Return to Transcripts main page
Erin Burnett Outfront
Trump Admin Official Who Quit: Iran Was Not On Verge Of Having A Nuke; Iran Out For Revenge; Democratic Winner OutFront. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired March 18, 2026 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[19:00:24]
ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next:
The breaking news, the top Trump official who resigned over the war is speaking out just now for the first time, saying tonight Iran was not on the verge of the nuclear weapon, questioning the intelligence that President Trump is getting from Israel. Much more on that ahead.
As Iran is out for revenge, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are under attack tonight, as the French president says flat out he is not helping Trump in the war.
And a rising star in the Democratic Party. She just won a major race running an ad with the punch line, "F Trump," says she wants to get rid of Chuck Schumer. The Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton is our guest.
Let's go OUTFRONT.
(MUSIC)
BURNETT: And good evening. I'm Erin Burnett, and welcome to a special edition of OUTFRONT, "The War with Iran".
The breaking news, no imminent threat. Trump's now former top counterterror official who just quit because of the war with Iran, has just broken his silence. Just moments ago, talking about Iran, saying that the country posed no imminent threat to the United States.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TUCKER CARLSON, HOST: Was Iran on the verge of getting a nuclear weapon?
JOE KENT, FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER: No. They weren't, you know, three weeks ago when this this started, and they weren't in June either. I mean, the Iranians have had a religious ruling, a fatwa against actually developing a nuclear weapon since 2004. That's been in place since 2004. That's available in the public sphere. But then also we had no intelligence to indicate that that fatwa was being disobeyed, or it was on the cusp of being lifted.
(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: Kent continuing to say that there was no intelligence that Iran was prepared to launch a, quote/unquote, big sneak attack.
Well, it comes as the war is escalating every day. And tonight, Iran hitting new targets causing extensive damage, striking after the U.S. and Israel attacked its oil and gas production facilities, which is a first crossing a new line in the war. Now, the response. Several Iranian missiles just intercepted over Riyadh and Saudi Arabia near the site of a major meeting between officials in the region.
Now, according to our Nic Robertson, who is in Riyadh tonight, the interceptors were fired from the center of the capital in Riyadh, which he says is unprecedented, right, prior strikes have been outside to the air base, the Prince Sultan Air Base.
Now, debris from one of the intercepts falling near a refinery. And now a natural gas site has been hit by a number of missiles in Qatar. Qatar saying that the attack from Iran caused major damage, warning that it is yet another escalation.
And the growing attacks have now sent the price of oil to more than $110 a barrel. As the conflict grows on the 19th day of the war and yes, the Strait of Hormuz is still closed, U.S. ships.
President Trump is finding himself more isolated. Just listen today to the French president, Emmanuel Macron.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
EMMANUEL MACRON, FRENCH PRESIDENT: France did not choose this war. We are not a party to the conflict. Therefore, France will under no circumstances take part in operations to open or liberate the Strait of Hormuz.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Categorical and by the way, a week ago, tanker companies were telling me, hey, it's going to be France. They're sending all these warships to the region, right? That there was hope that that might happen. And now a very categorical answer from the French president.
Jeremy Diamond is OUTFRONT live in Tel Aviv. Alayna Treene is at the White House for us tonight.
I want to start with you, Jeremy, because right now, we've got this escalation. You know, our Nic Robertson in Riyadh talking about this unprecedented moment of interceptors being fired from the center of Riyadh and now Israel hitting Iran's navy, they say, in the Caspian Sea. What more can you tell us?
JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN JERUSALEM CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, Erin, this really has been an extraordinary day and one that points to this conflict continuing to grow rather than any kind of diplomatic off ramps presenting themselves. It began today with the news that Iran's energy facilities have had been struck in one of the largest strikes on their energy infrastructure that we have seen during this war to date, two different oil and natural gas production facilities in the south of the country. Israel responsible for those strikes, though Iran blamed both the United States and Israel, and subsequently it vowed that it would take powerful action against other oil infrastructure targets in the region.
And we saw that action take place very shortly thereafter with that Qatari gas facility that was struck this evening bursting into flames and Qatar now firing back at Iran, at least on the diplomatic front, saying that they have declared Iran's military and security attaches persona non grata.
[19:05:04]
The Qataris fuming about the fact that Iran chose to retaliate by attacking their oil and gas facilities and we are also, of course, seeing those sites in Saudi Arabia. And then beyond that, Erin, as you mentioned, we've also seen tonight that the Israeli military has, for the first time struck Iranian naval ships in the Caspian Sea, that is to the north of Iran. And we haven't seen these types of strikes yet.
And this comes, of course, as Israeli officials have continuously been telling us to expect more surprises.
Again today, the Israeli defense minister, Israel Katz, talked about this notion of more surprises as he was also talking about continuing to target Iran's senior leaders with new plans now to make it easier for the Israeli military to jump through hoops, fewer approvals in order to target those senior leaders, should the operational and intelligence opportunity arise -- Erin.
BURNETT: All right. Jeremy Diamond, thank you very much.
And interesting. The Israelis keep saying to us, more surprises, more surprises. And then, well, they do deliver that. So, when they say they're more at this point, of course, it really does beg the question of how much more escalation is ahead.
Everyone's here with me on set.
Seth, you just heard what Joe Kent said, right? Speaking out for the first time. And you know, you've got this this religious ruling, the fatwa. I mean, I was with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Pezeshkian, in September, and it's the first thing he started off with. You know, they always would say that like the religious leader at the time, Ayatollah Khamenei senior, had said we would not develop a nuclear weapon. And, you know, and then he went on to say, and by the way, if we wanted one by now, we would have had one.
But Joe Kent is backing that.
SETH JONES, PRESIDENT, DEFENSE & SECURITY DEPARTMENT, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: Yeah. I think what, what he is indicating and we've heard this over the last several weeks is that Iran was not on the verge of having a nuclear weapon. I think the challenge hearing it from the Israelis as I spoke to them over the last few months, is Iran was weak. They were vulnerable to an attack. So, I think the Israeli position was that there was going to be potentially no better time than right now. Hezbollah was weaker than it had been. The Iranian regime, the U.S. and the Israelis had struck last year. And the Israelis got air dominance over Iran.
In four days, the Russians don't even have that in Ukraine after nearly after over -- we're in the fifth year. So, I think there was an opportunity. But there was nothing imminent in that sense.
BURNETT: Right, right. And I guess there's also a question of if -- even if they are correct that this was the best time, does not still mean that it was a good time I mean that that is the real question. We don't know, right? I mean --
MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, U.S. ARMY (RET.): It was an opportunity. I think it's fair to say there was a target. There was an opportunity.
BURNETT: And okay -- and -- but when we -- where we are now, as you see, escalatory, whether there weren't a formal ladder or just going up and up, General Marks, what we have seen now, center of Riyadh, that's new, a cluster munition used in Tel Aviv within the past 24 hours that came off a missile that had not yet been used in this conflict, they had been using some of their older missiles.
So, are there weapons that Iran has not used yet in their arsenal now, whether they are destroyed or whether they're being saved up, I understand is a question, but what have you not seen that you know, they had.
MARKS: Well, you know, Erin, in case of the missile that just hit Tel Aviv, a couple of ways to look at it. One, it's new and they're going to roll that thing out. And there are more of those that are available or that the end of their -- at the end of their normal stockpile and they're moving, they're going to move into the new stuff that may or may not have been tested.
BURNETT: Yeah.
MARKS: The additional thing about what we haven't seen up to date, we have not seen anti-ship ballistic missiles which I think is telling, it also indicates that they were probably waiting for more tankers to make themselves available in the streets or if the United States Navy had had taken on that escort mission, then they would have been vulnerable at that point, albeit the navy has counter anti-ship missile capabilities the other thing is there's no discussion about the submarine capabilities that the Iranians have.
Again, I have to assume that our subs have already taken care of that. And then the Iranians have talked about mining the straits. We don't know that, hasn't been detected. Again, the capabilities exist to detect, identify and then render safe all that stuff.
BURNETT: Right.
I want to get to the subs in a second because you're talking about their navy, and that's central to something I want to ask. But first, when General Marks talks about those anti-ship missiles, those which are understood to have come with a lot of support from Russia, and we understand Russia's involvement here. And Seth's talked a lot about this has been intricate and detailed.
So how much -- how significant is Russia's role right now as you understand it?
CHRISTO GROZEV, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: Well, I think to assess that you have to look at what the role has been in the period leading up to the war, because it's not something that just starts now.
[19:10:01]
BURNETT: Yeah.
GROZEV: We've been monitoring the physical trips and interactions between Russia's top intelligence officers, both from the GRU and from the FSB, that peaked and has plateaued, actually has remained at a very high level at the start of the war in Ukraine. Part of it was explained by the fact that Iran started providing Russia --
BURNETT: The drones.
GROZEV: The drones, Shahed drones, which Russia in turn upgraded, developed and added something that Iran never had which was a second to none, anti-jamming device or system that the Russians have.
And in subsequent trips that we monitored the same people that are using the devices and or the Shahed in Ukraine. They went back to share their findings and their improvements. And this was a requirement, apparently, that Iran had imposed on Russia for them to get the Shahed. So, this has been going on continuously.
And part of this cooperation was not just military cooperation. It was also counterintelligence. And also repressive sharing, like best practices on how to suppress.
BURNETT: How to suppress crowds. And when --
GROZEV: We saw some of the people that traveled were the same guys who were in charge of repressions in Russia, so this has been very, very intense. What we see now is a careful and not transparent providing of assistance. I think there's still some appearance at least of holding back and not providing the full.
There's no trips, there are no physical travel of advisors from Russia to Iran right now, but there's a lot of data being shared. That's what we do see. We don't see what is being shared, but the volume of data between the same phones and devices of the same people who traveled before in the direction of abroad which we assume is now Iran, because it started peaking after the invasion or after the attack is commensurate with images sharing of images, which is what we would expect Russia to be providing to --
BURNETT: For targeting. GROZEV: For targeting, right. And again, coming back to what Russia lacked at the beginning of the war in Ukraine was precise, spatial and satellite data on Ukraine. They found out they had outdated data from their satellites. So, they traveled to China to get the latest and best 3D and color photography from Chinese satellites.
And that was an important thing for Russian army. We believe that we're seeing the same thing in Iran now. Iran needs this this micro data that only Russia and China can provide.
BURNETT: I mean, it's stunning when you look at that, though, that the back and forth and now the data being shared, General Marks, in the context of Trump pulling back sanctions on Putin, enabling him to sell more crude oil.
MARKS: Does it make sense?
BURNETT: No.
MARKS: If you're looking at trying to advance what our objectives are in Iran and we haven't really heard those stated clearly, what is the desired end state now? Is it all about nukes, missiles and proxies? Which I think is probably the objective.
And now I think we're into a phase where I think the way to describe it is we started, I think, with strategic clarity, with tactical brilliance and now we're getting lost. And is this now about regime change, which was not our priority? What was talking about? So how -- how we engage with China, how we engage with Russia. And I tell you, I think both of them come out of this in a winning position or a positive position.
BURNETT: It's incredible just what you lay out there on the data and the flights and the back and forth. You mentioned the subs, okay, the subs, Iranian subs now, Seth, this is a question because when General Marks is saying, well, where are those subs and are they still there?
Well, an Israeli source told CNN today that Israel had struck Iranian naval assets in the Caspian Sea. Okay? Now, 11 days ago, though, 11 days ago, Trump said this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We wiped out their navy, the navy is now at the bottom of the sea.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Now, we wiped out their navy. The navy is now at the bottom of the sea. But today, 11 days later, Israel saying they're still striking Iranian naval assets. So, how's that happening?
JONES: Well, we also obliterated their nuclear program, too.
BURNETT: Last summer, that's right.
JONES: We still struck targets.
Look, I think the reality is regardless of what the rhetoric is, that the Iranian navy is been degraded, but it still has capabilities. I mean two things along these lines. First is the Iranian navy has never been particularly strong after the Iran-Iraq war, the Iranians put most of their capabilities not into big conventional forces, but into asymmetric ones. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards, including its Quds force.
And even on the navy side, I think the most dangerous part has been the naval side of the IRGC, which includes their small attack boats ones which are capable of laying one, two three mines. They had hundreds of them at the beginning of this war according to the most recent assessments, our most recent assessments, it is highly likely that a number of them have been destroyed, but not all of them.
And it doesn't take a lot to really cause concern in the Strait of Hormuz when you still have some mine laying capabilities from small attack boats. So, when we talk about the navy I think they do have capabilities to do things like lay mines.
[19:15:04]
And we don't know about the status of their submersibles yet.
MARKS: We have a significant mine-countermeasure capability. But what Seth just described is kind of top of mind as we now start to talk about securing passage through.
BURNETT: Well, the tanker CEOs of oil, they're not -- they're not -- they're not going to put their crews a possible death, right?
MARKS: The risk premiums are going off the charts.
BURNETT: Right. And then there's insurance.
Christo, I just want to play something Joe Kent, the counterterror official in that interview just said something else. Let me play it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENT: There was no intelligence that said, hey, on whatever day it was, March 1st, the Iranians are going to launch this big sneak attack. They're going to do some kind of a 9/11, Pearl Harbor, et cetera. They're going to attack one of our bases. There was none of that intelligence.
Again, back to what we know about the Iranians, they're very, very deliberate with the escalation ladder. And again, they're only deliberate under President Trump's leadership because they knew and they took President Trump very, very seriously.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Okay, Christo, I'm just curious, because you have -- this is the head of counterterror for the United States. He just stepped aside. He's saying these things about Trump.
You have NATO not backing Trump. You have Emmanuel Macron, who is sort of maybe out there is would he consider when others hadn't categorically saying no, we are not with you. Okay? How does Putin see Trump right now?
GROZEV: Well, it's not a one dimensional consequence for Putin at the moment. We have to be careful and not to assume that all of this is helping him. What is helping him, clearly, is the oil price. I mean, most of the Russian economists, well in the privacy of their kitchens, were expecting that the Russian economy will collapse before the end of this year, in a way that they would not be able to maintain or sustain the war effort in Ukraine. Now, that has changed, because suddenly there's this booster injection, right?
A second reason for Putin to be happy is obviously the division. The further division in the West and NATO that that was again accelerated through this non-coordinated attack on Iran, which may have been an opportunistic choice, but not coordinated and therefore not necessarily strategically right.
At the same time, if we look at what is negative to Putin, we have to understand that even before this happened, there was a -- there was a division within the Kremlin within the power elite in Russia. And we've talked on your show about this, that there was this militarized, like extremely far right group within the military that really believes that Putin is being liberal and too slow on attacking the West attacking the -- striking back at the main adversary, which is Russia.
Now, suddenly, they're seeing an opportunity for a proxy attack on the main adversary, and they still think that Putin is not doing it well, strongly enough and part of that is because of this ongoing discussion and negotiation with the United States with Trump, which a lot of this militarized elite thinks that is a business discussion as opposed to something in the national interest of Russia.
So, all of these are creating kernels of instability within Russia at the moment. And I wouldn't be surprised. And I don't expect that to be the main scenario, but it wouldn't be surprised if this results in that. In a repeat of what Prigozhin did a couple of years ago, because these people think that that Putin does not understand the danger to their system, that what has happened in Iran is signifying.
BURNETT: That's an incredible thing to say. Prigozhin, of course, was the general who marched on Moscow and ended up dead in a plane crash not long thereafter.
OUTFRONT next, our breaking news coverage continues. We're going to talk to a former member of Trump's Iran negotiating team. He wrote four days before the war that Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the United States and that the Strait of Hormuz would be compromised by a war. He's our guest next.
And Iran confirming its intelligence chief was killed by Israel. That is the third Iranian assassination in two days. So how is Israel able to do this?
And the Pentagon turning to 5,000 pound bombs, they say, to try and secure the Strait of Hormuz, but is this really all just going to end up with American soldiers on the ground?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:23:28]
BURNETT: Welcome back to a special edition of OUTFRONT, "The War with Iran".
The breaking news that Trump's former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, who just resigned, put out the letter saying that he could not conscience being in that job because of President Trump's decisions in this war with Iran, has spoken out. Just a couple moments ago, he spoke to Tucker Carlson, and he questioned the intelligence that Trump is getting from Israel.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENT: And again, when we would hear or you'd hear what they were saying, it didn't reflect in intelligence channels, even intelligence that we shared with the Israelis and the Israelis were giving us, in many cases. So, there was there was a clear gap between, you know, the intelligence and then the information that the president was given and the decisions that the president was making.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: I want to go straight to Alayna Treene. She's at the White House.
So, Alayna, you hear Joe Kent saying this and saying that there was no imminent threat and being very, very clear and detailed. The White House is doing everything they can now to discredit him, even though, of course, he was in charge of counterterror and President Trump had backed him and put him in that role. The White House seems to be concerned.
ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. I mean, I should just say off the bat, Erin, it's remarkable to hear someone who was just yesterday one of the most senior intelligence officials in the Trump administration to be sharing what he is and to be laying out how he believed there was no imminent threat, that the intelligence did not show that, that the intelligence didn't show that Iran was close to making a nuclear weapon, really disputing what we have heard from the president himself and top other top Trump administration officials.
[19:25:06]
But look, you're exactly right. We've seen the White House in the aftermath of his resignation really seeking to try and discredit him and to try to argue that he was someone who was sidelined months previously over issues that the administration had already had with Kent. They argued that he was left out of Iran intelligence briefings, that he was not involved in Iran planning.
And they also argued -- one administration official to me, and I know other reporters as well, arguing that the White House had actually directed Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, who worked above him to fire him previously, and that she didn't. I will say another intelligence official disputed that.
But the Gabbard of all this, of this all is also very interesting, because like Kent, Gabbard in the past has shown these anti- interventionist views. And what was so striking to me was yesterday was actually the first time we heard from Gabbard on this war since it broke out and what she said after hearing Kent say essentially that there was no imminent threat posed by Iran, she said that it was up essentially to the president to determine what is an imminent threat, but she notably did not say whether she agreed with that or if the intelligence supported it.
And she repeated those comments when she was before the Senate today. And so, of course it raises a lot of questions about what Gabbard actually thinks right now in this moment as well.
BURNETT: Yeah, Alayna, thank you very much. And very clear. Obviously, given her role, it was what she did not say that spoke a thousand words.
OUTFRONT now, Nate Swanson, he was the Iran director for the White House National Security Council from 2022 until 2025. And a member of Trump's Iran negotiating team.
So, obviously, in the center of this and knows these details, Nate has since come out to warn the public about this war writing an article just now with the headline how Americas war on Iran backfired.
And, Nate, I appreciate your time and your decision to speak out and give us more information. You know, you hear Joe Kent say Iran was not an imminent threat, number one. And number two was not close to getting a nuclear weapon. Those two things obviously don't have to be related. He is explicitly saying neither of them add up in terms of Trump's justifications when he said both imminent threat and about to get a nuclear weapon.
Is your understanding the same as Joe Kent on these issues?
NATE SWANSON, FORMER MEMBER OF TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S RIAN NEGOTIATING TEAM: Partially. I mean, look, Iran is absolutely a threat to American interests and has been for a long time. I think what's accurate is that there was not anything that significantly changed to warrant a military intervention at this time, you know, and the president didn't make a good case for why that -- why striking now.
And I think your previous panelists had hit the nail on the head when they said this was just the timing, and the opportunity really drove the decision to strike. Not actually an actual threat.
BURNETT: So four days before the war, Nate, you wrote an article in "Foreign Affairs" and you predicted, as you just said there, you said Iran did not pose an imminent threat to the United States. You also said a war with Iran could last much longer than the White House anticipates. You said the Strait of Hormuz could be compromised and that Iran could attack Gulf countries in retaliation.
I go down that list. Check, check, check, check. Okay, so I guess this is a really, really crucial question since you've been in the inside of these rooms, Nate. You know so many people who are there.
Was Trump told about any of these things?
SWANSON: Yeah, I'm sure he was. And you can see the impact that some of the assessments from the intelligence community and the Defense Department are having, right? They're getting to him because, and we know this because they're being leaked to "The New York Times", "The Washington Post" immediately after.
I mean, so you can see the impact they're having on him. But I think really what drove his motivation here was this past precedent of basically proving the critics wrong. You know, he did the strikes in June on Iran's nuclear program. There was no repercussions. He did the Maduro op, no repercussions. Soleimani op, same thing.
And so, I think there was just this extreme confidence that they could go in, do this strike. And it would be fine. And I just think and I wrote at the time that this was really misreading how Iran would react. And I think there was a reason they sought off ramps in the past. And they weren't going to this time.
BURNETT: Yeah. And perhaps an Icarus moment.
So Iran's leadership, obviously, you know, even as I know intelligence -- intelligence community still judges the regime to be, you know, present certainly it's very visible that it's still there, but nonetheless, a lot of the leadership has been killed right? Nineteen days of strikes and they have been killed.
I want to just play something else Joe Kent just said a moment ago that could be a consequence of that. All of those taking out of individuals.
Here he is.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KENT: Going aggressively after the ayatollah was the last thing that we ever should have done again, like I'm no fan of the former supreme leader, Ali Khamenei. However, he was moderating their nuclear program. He was preventing them from getting a nuclear weapon.
If you take him out, if you kill him aggressively, people are going to rally around that regime. And the next ayatollah that you get, and I think this is the case by all data that we have with his son -- the next ayatollah that you get is going to be more radical.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Do you agree with that?
SWANSON: Partially. I mean, we shouldn't mourn Khamenei's death on any fronts, right? I mean, the guy's responsible for the deaths of Americans, for the deaths of Israelis and for, you know the, the extreme repression of his own people. So, look, I mean, I don't think we should feel sad about his departure on any front.
And he's really, he's -- has 37 years of pursuing just an extremely aggressive foreign policy that's driven Iran into the ground. So that's the case.
The problem with him dying right now is not necessarily there's a rally around the flag impact or anything like that, it's just that there was going to be this opportunity when he died for a chance for Iran to chart a new future. You know, he had kept Iran from changing and really from any kind of internal reform, any kind of external reform. And by being a martyr, unfortunately, it's like probably the best thing he ever did for the Islamic Republic is because he is now basically taking the opportunity for reform and delayed it for, for years by, by dying in this fashion.
So I think that's really unfortunate. And I think its ultimately hurts the Iranian people who actually wanted legitimate change. And so, you know, it's very unfortunate that this final act of his has helped Islamic Republic, probably more than anything else he did in his entire 37-year tenure.
BURNETT: Which is a really incredible thing to say. And just to remind people of the very basics. He was an old man nearing 90. He was not well.
And, you know he was going to die of natural causes at some point in the not-too-distant future.
SWANSON: Hopefully.
BURNETT: Right, Nate -- yeah, Nate, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.
And next, the breaking news. Weve just gotten some new video in. This is Pentagon provided of the U.S. launching new strikes on Iran.
Plus, the Pentagon says it intends to keep using its 5,000-pound bombs near the Strait of Hormuz. So, they say it's to open it. Okay. But let's look at that in detail. What are those bombs actually hitting? What are they doing to the strait?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:36:20]
BURNETT: We are back with our special edition, "War with Iran". The breaking news right now, we've got a new U.S.. Intelligence assessment on Iran. And this is according to the DNI, and according to Gabbard, the Iranian regime, quote, "appears to be intact but largely degraded". Now this comes as Iran confirms its intelligence chief has now been killed by Israel, adding to a now very long list of senior leaders in Iran who have been killed in this war and strikes.
And tonight, we're getting new details on how Israel is finding and targeting these leaders.
OUTFRONT now, the former Israeli national security advisor, who also spent 23 years in the Mossad, Eyal Hulata.
And, Eyal, it's good to have you back.
So, you know, I guess we look at this, these pictures, right? And you just see picture, picture, picture. So many have been eliminated. And in some cases, Israel has gone and eliminated the replacements of the originals in those roles.
So, Iran knows its leaders are being targeted. And yet even after that, with all the security steps that they're taking, whether it be bunkers or no communications or whatever it might be, Israel is still killing them and has been successfully able to do so.
How have they been doing it?
EYAL HULATA, FORMER ISRAELI NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER: So first, Erin, it's good to see you again. Welcome back to D.C.
I think this -- this -- there are a few things we need to, to see in this. The first is yes, there is intelligence capabilities that are very exquisite and superior, both for Israel and the United States. This is not just Israeli intelligence participating in this. And the level of penetration into Iran is significant.
By the way, you know, to comment on previous things on the panel, this intelligence also provided the understanding of what Iran was actually planning should there have been no intervention but we can live this aside. I don't want to get into the specifics of classified information about what Iran was or wasn't planning to do in the near future.
But in any case, definitely this is an example of, of how good the intelligence is, but there's another element in this, and this is the participation of the Iranian people. The Iranian people themselves understand the magnitude of the opportunity that is here, and they're actively participating in ways that we haven't seen before in providing this kind of information.
So, some of those targets, while they're in hiding are being recognized by the people on the ground who do understand that this is important for their ability to prevail over time. And they provide ample information about the whereabouts of this officers, about their hiding places where they're at. And then, of course, the intelligence community, either Israeli or American needs to cross-check this. We don't just, you know, bomb without a good understanding of where this is, but we are able to do this when we get those important tips on real time.
And the proof at the end is on the list of pictures that you put back there on the screen, it's proven very effective. BURNETT: So "The Wall Street Journal" had reviewed the contents of a phone call that they say was between a senior Iranian police commander and a Mossad agent. So according to "The Journal", Eyal, it goes like this.
Mossad agent, we know everything about you. You're on our blacklist, and we have all the information about you. I called to warn you in advance that you should stand with your people's side. And if you will not do that, your destiny will be as your leader. Do you hear me?
The commander then says, brother, I swear on the Koran. I am not your enemy. I am a dead man already. Just please come help us.
I mean, Eyal, what's stunning about this is, you know, I guess this indicates that you've got a commander on the ground who still has communications, but also that there's a Mossad agent who has the guy's phone number and calls him up and they actually have a conversation.
[19:40:01]
That's -- that's pretty incredible.
Is that happening? I mean, if it's happening here, it's got to be happening in a lot of other places, right?
HULATA: Well, hard for me to confirm specific operational incidents, Erin. But by and large, yes, the level of penetration that is there is significant. And by the way, I think in this article when they say agent that doesn't mean an Israeli doing this from the outside were talking about Iranians on the ground who are committed to the collapse of the regime because they want to fight for their -- for their freedom.
We're talking about people who understand that they cannot do this alone. When they try to do this alone, back in January, two months ago, they were massacred on the streets. No one was helping them at the time. This was before all of this campaign started.
They did this on their own. They wanted their freedom. They were massacred in tens of thousands and they're reaching out for help. They've reached out for help with us. They've reached out for help with Washington. They've requested this assistance, and they are participating now actively.
In a sense, it is us helping them. This is not the kind of intelligence gathering where the issue is how to recruit them so they can help us give information. They have called for help.
And I think this is very genuine and its large numbers. And we see this all around, and we see also if you look at the response of the commander of the police, he also understands what is going on to -- if we take what he what was reported at face value, he understands maybe on which side he needs to be because if there is another round of protests, what would this person do and his friends from the police? Will they again fire at their fellow Iranians on the street? Or will they understand that something is really happening? BURNETT: All right. Well, Eyal, and this is all very fascinating,
especially what you're describing, which obviously is a very significant role of not just all the signals intelligence and all of the technology that Israel has and agents that are Israeli. But Iranians, actual Iranians on the ground.
Eyal, thank you so much. It is good to see you again and see you very soon.
And the Pentagon, meantime, says it is not letting up on its strikes on the Strait of Hormuz. Are they going to work or is this why American soldiers will be on the ground? Magic wall is next to go through the details here. And a promising newcomer in the Democratic Party scoring a major victory overnight, she ran on abolishing ice and she ran incredibly directly on attacking Trump.
So, is that the new winning message for Democrats? The Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton is our guest.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:46:35]
BURNETT: Welcome back to a special edition of OUTFRONT, "The War with Iran".
The breaking news now a new and highly produced video has been posted just now by U.S. Central Command, and it shows fighter aircraft taking off. It shows them striking targets. It's almost like out of a movie, as so much of the things they've released have been. It's set to music, which is a sort of set to glorify -- very warrior-like music.
Strait of Hormuz is still closed tonight, though. And Trump now appears increasingly isolated in his push to secure it, right? Even France has said no way now.
So, the U.S. has now dropped multiple 5,000-pound deep penetration munitions along the strait, okay? Targeting -- hitting anti-ship missile systems, they say. So, what we understand is this is a GBU-72 bunker buster, and it's the first known operational use of this.
So, General Marks is back with me now.
All right. So GBU 72 I said really fast as if everybody should know what those are. Okay, but this is, as we say, first time used operationally. So, what is it? How is it being used?
MARKS: Yeah, let me show you. Let me show you what this is a video obviously that's been produced. I'll just show this for a couple of seconds, but it gives you a sense of the size. This is a 5,000-pound bomb is --
BURNETT: So, it's -- I mean, just to make the point, this is big. You see it.
MARKS: Yeah, as you can see there. Now, let me -- let me go back to the map, which is what you were talking about originally. What was given was this box is where those were struck. So, what I'm going to do is within the Zagros mountains, very mountainous, very difficult, these are -- could be positions where they would have anti-ship ballistic missiles launchers buried deeply underground, as well as mine laying capabilities. What that would give --
BURNETT: They've got the high ground.
MARKS: They've got the high ground, and anything that's coming through the straits they would be able to affect. Now, let me also show you what the difference is between the two. Youve talked about GBU-72. We also have GBU-75.
This is a 5,000-pound bomb. This is --
BURNETT: What we're using here in Hormuz.
MARKS: This is the one that was just used yesterday. First combat use, 3-17, Happy Saint Patrick's Day.
And this one was back in June -- June 25th. What this has is this can only this bomb can only be delivered by the -- by the B-2, which is based Missouri.
BURNETT: That's when they saw them take off. They -- you know, that real that long flight.
MARKS: And they don't land. They don't land any place other than Missouri. Take off from and return to they are airborne routinely which means you're less flexible. This, on the other hand, can be delivered by the F-15 E model, the F-35 and certainly --
BURNETT: So, it can come from anywhere in the region
MARKS: Much more flexibility provided the combat commander, if he's trying to strike a target.
BURNETT: Okay, so they're doing this, they say to try to secure the street. And now the U.S. is alone on this. So, first of all, you laid out this mountainous situation, right? It's not as easy as, okay, it's just -- it's not like the Suez Canal. It's a flat desert on both sides. You know, have been to both places.
So, are boots on the ground then, is that why we're talking about that? Because this isn't going to be enough to secure the mountains?
MARKS: Well, what you would hope would be there would be sufficient degradation of these capabilities here.
[19:50:01]
And again, what we're looking at is the possibility of locations here again, these are theoretical positions that have the ability to do this. If that is not, if the attack through the air, this maritime air campaign is insufficient then there may be a requirement to put boots on the ground that would come up through here -- through here. BURNETT: Taking any incoming fire.
MARKS: They would -- they would then have to go ashore. And if they go ashore, if this is the marines, they're going to have to go ashore. If you have to assume it's going to be contested, they've got to secure where it is they're landing. That's Bandar Abbas, so would probably be off to the side over here.
Once you land there, you conduct what's called artillery raids, where you bring in artillery pieces and you begin firing against these locations. What you want to do, neutralize those and push them back. So, you now own a bigger piece of Iran, which then eliminates their ability to fire in on this. That's an incredibly difficult task.
The marines can do that. They know how to do that. But when you start putting boots on the ground, you now have to have the determination --
BURNETT: And when you're talking about artillery, you know, I'm thinking Ukraine, artillery is where you're putting lives at risk.
MARKS: You do. And when are you finished? What does the end state look like?
BURNETT: Yeah. All right. General Marks, thank you very much.
And next, we're going to talk to a rising star in the Democratic Party. Just won a major primary. And she did it by taking on not just Trump but Chuck Schumer and she's next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BURNETT: Tonight, a rising star in the Democratic Party who just won a very competitive race by running on a clear message about Donald Trump and his policies.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JULIANA STRATTON (D), ILLINOIS SENATE CANDIDATE: I'm not scared of a wannabe dictator. I'm running for senate to stand up to Donald Trump. I'll abolish ICE and hold Trump accountable for the crimes he's committed. Just like they said --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump.
[19:55:00]
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) Trump.
GOV. J.B. PRITZKER (D), ILLINOIS: Vote Giuliani
STRATTON: That's why I approved this message
(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: Very direct. And of course, that's the Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton, who will be our guest in just a moment. She beat out the more moderate Democrats in a very closely watched primary overnight.
Her biggest backer, Governor J.B. Pritzker, who you just saw at the end of her ad. Stratton is now widely favored to win the Senate seat that's being vacated by Dick Durbin, who's retiring.
And OUTFRONT now is the Illinois Lieutenant Governor Juliana Stratton.
So, thank you so much. I appreciate your time, Juliana.
So then -- what does your victory say? When we see that ad, right? You don't mince words. You put it out there. What does that say about where your party is headed?
STRATTON: Well, I think it's reflective of the real frustration that so many voters have with what's happening in Washington and the fact that people want to disrupt the status quo. They don't want to see this sort of go along to get along mentality, when we have a president who is a wannabe dictator and they're wondering, why are we still trying to just go about business as usual?
People are frustrated. People are angry, and they're looking for leaders who are going to meet this moment. They want to know that somebody is going to go to the mat fighting for them. And that's what I heard almost consistently as I traveled every corner of the state. And I'm proud that I can look voters in the eye and say, I'm going to be that fighter for them. It certainly was a message that resonated in the primary, and I'm going to keep talking about how I want to take their voices with me to Washington all the way through this general election.
BURNETT: All right. So, what I talked about there and what we saw in that ad, right, you are handling things in a way different than some in the Democratic establishment. Right? Which brings me to the Leader Chuck Schumer, the senate minority leader, and another one of your signature campaign promises. Take a look at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
STRATTON: I simply cannot support Chuck Schumer as leader.
I will not support Chuck Schumer as leader in the Senate.
Chuck Schumer should not be the leader of the Democratic Party.
I will not support Chuck Schumer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BURNETT: Again, Lieutenant Governor, you're very direct. You're very consistent. I guess the question then is this if you win, you're in the Senate. If it's not Schumer, who should it be? STRATTON: Well, I'm sure we will have several people who will
potentially put their names forward, and I will consider all of them and hear what plan they have. But look, the main thing that I know is that people want to make sure that there's someone who is going to bring the kind of energy that's needed to go against a president who is spending every single day trying to take away our rights, take away health care, rip food off the table of you know, hungry children. And, of course, have attacked and terrorized so many of our communities including those right here in Illinois with Operation Midway Blitz.
And so, I'm going to look to see who's going to bring the kind of courageous, bold leadership that's needed to make sure that we protect our rights and move our country forward and that's what I said as a candidate for United States Senate here in Illinois, that I'll bring that kind of bold visionary leadership. And I think we need to see that from the leader of our party as -- leaders of our party as well.
BURNETT: So, when Israel was bombing Iranian nuclear targets, but before the United States directly intervened. So, this was last summer, you wrote in part, you posted, Lieutenant Governor, Iran is a terrorist state and sponsor of terror worldwide. Iran having nuclear weapons is a threat to the United States and global peace. And it is in Americas interest that we never allow that to happen.
Then the war with Iran begins in February. And you wrote in part, Donald Trump committed acts of war without any authorization from Congress and no plan for what comes next.
So, I guess, do you see those two things as consistent? And is there anything that would happen at this point to change your vote?
STRATTON: Well, first of all, let me just start with what we are seeing happen with this president where Americans wake up the next day after the president has posted probably 2:00 a.m. in the morning about an act of war and not going to Congress. And I've always been consistent that he has not followed what I believe are the procedures that he should follow to get authorization. He doesn't have a plan. He doesn't tell us what the reason that he's taking this action, and we don't know what's coming up next.
And I believe that there should be more oversight and accountability, especially to a president that is not clearly always acted in the best interest of the American people. No one is asking for us to be dragged into another forever war. And I can tell you that I, for one, would not authorize or vote for any supplemental funding for this war. We need to make sure that there are proper checks and accountability with this president. And that's exactly the kind of leader I will -- leadership I will bring.
BURNETT: Lieutenant Governor Stratton, we appreciate your time and thank you so much.
STRATTON: Thank you for having me.
BURNETT: And thanks so much to all of you for joining us as well.
"AC360" starts now.
