'You Don't Know What You're Talking About': Rubio Wipes the Floor With Brennan Over Iranian Nukes

There are some things I'd never do in life. I'd never challenge Usain Bolt to a race. I'd never have a conversation with Clarence Thomas and pretend to know more about the law than he does. I'd never volunteer to tackle Derrick Henry, and I'd never try to tell Peyton Manning how to throw a football. And I'd certainly never try to outsmart Secretary of State Marco Rubio on something like foreign intelligence.

But Margaret Brennan doesn't seem to know how to stay in her lane. I guess she enjoys embarrassing herself on national television? That's the only thing I can come up with.

Rubio made the media rounds on Sunday morning, and among his appearances was a spot on "Face the Nation." As you can imagine, Donald Trump's decision to beautifully bomb Iran's nuclear facilities was the topic of discussion. Brennan seemed to fancy herself some sort of foreign intelligence expert, and as you can also imagine, Rubio made her look like an absolute moron.

The interview started with Brennan asking about Iran's capabilities to retaliate against the United States.

Rubio responded by saying that Iran should choose peace, but that the United States is prepared for anything the regime could throw our way. He also doubled down on the fact that this was not an attack on the country but simply a move to eliminate their nuclear capabilities. He concluded:

So this mission was a very precise mission. It had three objectives, three nuclear sites. It was not attack on Iran. It was not an attack on the Iranian people. This wasn't a regime change move. This was designed to degrade and/or destroy three nuclear sites related to their nuclear weaponization ambitions, and that was delivered on yesterday. What happens next will now depend on what Iran chooses to do next. If they choose the path of diplomacy, we're ready. We can do a deal that's good for them, the Iranian people and good for the world. If they choose another route, then there will be consequences for that.

But Brenna didn't seem to like that phrase "weaponization ambitions." She followed up by asking, "Are you saying there, that the United States did not see intelligence that the Supreme Leader had ordered weaponization?"

Rubio tried to respond: "That's irrelevant. I see that question being asked in the media all the--that's an irrelevant question, they have everything they need to build the weapon."

Brennan interrupted; "That is the key point in U.S. intelligence assessments. You know that."

After a little back and forth, Rubio finally replied, "Well, I know that better than you know that, and I know that that's not the case. You don't know what you're talking about."

Brennan interrupted again: "But I'm asking you whether the order was given."

Rubio, who was very much over this line of questioning, began laying out what we know — what almost everyone who pays attention knows — about Iran's nuclear program.

It doesn't matter the order was given. They have everything they need to build nuclear weapons. Why would you bury things in a mountain, 300 feet under the ground? Why would you bury — why do they have 60% enriched uranium? You don't need 60% enriched uranium. The only countries in the world that have uranium at 60% are countries that have nuclear weapons, because it can quickly make it 90. They have all the elements they have. Why do they have a space program? Is Iran going to go to the moon? No, they're trying to build an ICBM so they can one day put a warhead on it.

But that wasn't enough for Brennan, who responded: "That's a question of intent. And you know, in the intelligence assessment that it was that Iran wanted to be a threshold state and use it as leverage...."

"How do you know what the intelligence assessment says?" Rubio asked incredulously.

Brennan replied that she was "talking about the public March assessment." She added, "And that's why I was asking you, if you know something more from March if an order was given."

Rubio went off:

Well, but that's also an inaccurate representation of it. That's not how intelligence is read. That's now how intelligence is used. Here's what the whole world knows. Forget about intelligence. What the IAEA knows they are enriching uranium well beyond anything you need for a- for a for a civil nuclear program. So why would you enrich uranium at 60%, if you don't intend to one day use it to take it to 90 and build a weapon? Why are you why are you developing ICBMs? Why do you have 8000 short range missiles and two to 3000 long- mid range missiles that you continue to develop? Why do you do all these things?

They have everything they need for a nuclear weapon. They have the delivery mechanisms, they have the enrichment capability, they have the highly enriched uranium that is stored.

That's all we need to see. Especially in the hands of the regime that's already involved in terrorism and proxies and all kinds of things. They are the source of all the instability in the Middle East.

Brennan tried to dig herself out of the hole, claiming that's not what she asked. "And no one's disputing. I'm not doing that here. And they were censured at the IAEA for that enrichment and for violating their non-proliferation agreements. I was simply asking if we had intelligence that there was an order to weaponize because you said 'weaponization ambitions,' which implies they weren't doing..." Rubio didn't even let her finish.

"Well, we have intelligence that they have everything they need to build a nuclear weapon, and that's more than enough," he said, clearly over it.

"Okay" was the only response Brennan could muster before suddenly deciding to switch topics.

If you'll recall, earlier this year, Rubio had to explain basic history to Brennan when she claimed Hitler "weaponized" free speech. (Maybe someone should have asked her if she had intelligence on that?) A month or so later, he then had to explain to her the difference between free speech and ties to terrorism. But this exchange from today may be the best one yet. Take a look for yourself:

MUST WATCH: @SecRubio schools Margaret Brennan on the Iranian regime's nuclear program.

"Why do they have 60% enriched uranium? ... The only countries in the world that have uranium at 60% are countries that have nuclear weapons because they can quickly make it 90%!" pic.twitter.com/XO8ol5jBIn
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 22, 2025

And if you can catch the entire interview, I highly recommend it. Rubio lays the entire situation in Iran out in a way no one else can. Here are a couple of clips:

"This is very simple. The President wants to resolve this diplomatically and peacefully. He gave them a chance to do that," says @SecRubio on Iran.

"What happens next is up to the regime." pic.twitter.com/wY5eUnX7xA
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 22, 2025

.@SecRubio: "We'll defend our people ... but let's hope they don't choose that route. Let's all hope that they actually decide, 'let's go negotiate' because we want a diplomatic and peaceful solution." pic.twitter.com/oYsaozIKl7
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) June 22, 2025

The State Department also just put out the entire transcript if you'd like to read it.

Donald Trump has been in office for five months, and he's accomplished so much for our country and the entire world. Bombing Iran's nuclear facilities over the weekend shows that he isn't done yet and has no intention of slowing down. We'll take you along on every minute of the ride and bring you real news and commentary without liberal bias. But we need your help to keep going.

When you sign up to become a PJ Media VIP Member, you not only play a major role in keeping conservative media alive, but you gain some perks for yourself, too. Right now, a membership is 60% off or less than $20 a year. You can't beat it. Just click this link to sign up and use the code word FIGHT to get the discount. We can't wait for you to join us!