From ‘annihilated’ to ‘imminent threat’: Trump administration contradicts president on Iran war

The hearing also came a day after the director of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned. Joe Kentdue to the Iran war. Kent claimed that Tehran posed no imminent threat to the United States and that the war was only launched under pressure from Israel.

After this action, US President Trump repeatedly claimed that Washington had completely “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear program.

Trump and his officials have reiterated that statement multiple times even as the United States negotiates with Iran over its nuclear program.

A key question remains – what threat does Tehran pose if Iran’s nuclear facilities are effectively gone and set back decades?

Trump said in his State of the Union address that Iran was trying to rebuild its nuclear program. White House adviser and special envoy Steve Witkoff went a step further, saying Iran was “a week away from possessing industrial-grade bomb-making materials.”

Thus, Iran’s “imminent nuclear threat” comes into play again.

However, during Wednesday’s hearing. Tulsi Gabbard refuted Trump and Witkoff’s claims and said Iran has made no effort to rebuild its program.

“Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was destroyed as a result of Operation Midnight Hammer (in June). Since then, Iran has made no efforts to rebuild its enrichment capabilities,” she said.

Trump also said in his SOTU speech that Iran was building an intercontinental ballistic missile that would have a range that would reach the United States.

But Gabbard’s comments again contradicted those of the president, saying the intelligence community’s assessment was the same as before, that Iran was not trying to restart its program.

Notably, Gabbard’s statement was highlighted only after Ossoff noticed that the director of national intelligence had omitted to mention Operation Midnight Hammer in her opening remarks.

Trump and the White House continue to argue that Iran poses an “imminent threat” to Washington, justifying another war in the Middle East.

However, things took a turn after Gabbard failed to comment on what “imminent threat” actually meant.

U.S. Director of National Intelligence Gabbard said in testimony that the U.S. president is the only person who can determine what is or is not an “imminent threat.”

“It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat,” Gabbard said. His statement was met with a sharp rebuke from Ossoff, who said it was the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what constituted a threat to the United States.

However, when the United States attacks Iran in June 2025, the first thing Iran does is to target American bases in the Gulf.

“They should not be going after all the other countries in the Middle East. These missiles were sent to go after them. They hit Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait. No one expected this. We were shocked. You know, they fought back,” Trump said.

Reports cited U.S. officials and sources familiar with intelligence assessments as saying Iran was considered likely to retaliate even before the attack. In addition, closing the Strait of Hormuz is also considered a possible retaliatory action by Iran.

White House press secretary Carolyn Leavitt said in a post on

In addition, Iran itself has publicly stated that any escalation or attack against it will be regarded as an act of war, and Trump has repeatedly warned that the United States may launch an attack when pressuring Iran to sign the nuclear agreement.