‘Here’s the Scoop’ – an all-new podcast from NBC News, hosted today by Yasmin Vossoughian

Summary

Dateline NBC – “Here’s the Scoop” Episode Summary

Host: Yasmin Vossoughian
Release Date: June 23, 2025
Podcast: “Here’s the Scoop” – NBC News’ new daily podcast breaking down the day’s biggest stories.

---

Introduction

In the inaugural episode of “Here’s the Scoop,” host Yasmin Vossoughian sets the stage for a daily deep dive into pressing global issues. The episode kicks off with a focus on escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly the recent conflict between the United States and Iran.

---

Iran’s Retaliatory Strikes: Insights from Richard Engel [00:02 – 07:43]

Yasmin introduces the first major topic: Iran’s retaliatory missile strikes against U.S. forces in the Middle East following a U.S. strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities. To provide an in-depth analysis, Yasmin speaks with Richard Engel, NBC News’ chief foreign correspondent stationed in Tel Aviv.

Key Points Discussed:

• Pre-Strike Intelligence: Richard Engel explains that Iran likely had prior intelligence about the U.S. strike. “It looks like Iran gave a heads up and it looks like even if they didn’t give one, that the Qataris had one. If the Qataris had one, the Americans had one,” Engel notes at [01:24].

• Nature of the Strike: The missile attack targeted a high-value U.S. base deemed a difficult target, resulting in no casualties. Engel emphasizes the symbolic nature of the strike: “They picked the hardest target in the Middle East and fired a limited number of missiles at it” ([02:28]).

• Iran’s Messaging: Iran aimed to portray the attack as a measured, proportional response rather than an escalation. They communicated a desire to de-escalate and move towards negotiations. Engel observes, “Nobody killed, nobody injured. They picked a Very hard target” ([03:07]).

• Potential for Escalation: Engel warns of the precarious situation, suggesting that miscalculations could spiral into a larger conflict. “If this brings us into a giant war in the Middle East and if this is the trigger, well, it seems like it would be a wild miscalculation” ([02:35]).

Comparison to Previous Events:

Drawing parallels to the assassination of IRGC head Qasem Soleimani, Yasmin and Engel discuss Iran’s pattern of retaliatory strikes that aim to display strength without crossing into full-scale war. “They went after a US Air base in Iraq, even less so,” Yasmin remarks ([02:52]).

---

Israel’s Strategy Towards Regime Change [04:20 – 07:43]

Yasmin shifts the conversation to Israel’s ongoing campaign against Iranian military and governmental targets.

Key Points Discussed:

• Targeting Repression Centers: Recent Israeli strikes have hit symbolic locations like Evin Prison in Tehran, known for holding political dissidents. Yasmin highlights the strategic nature of these attacks: “They targeted it in a way in which the prisoners were not harmed. They were actually released” ([04:20]).

• Objective of Regime Change: Engel elaborates on Israel’s broader goal of undermining Iran’s security apparatus to facilitate potential regime change. “They are trying to take away the tools that the Iranian state uses to keep itself in power” ([05:01]).

• Divergence Between U.S. and Israeli Agendas: While the U.S. administration officially states it does not seek regime change, Engel points out that Israel’s actions suggest otherwise. “They have been attacking the Iranian military leadership on a daily basis... this is a tool of regime change” ([05:45]).

---

White House’s Response: Interview with Peter Alexander [10:20 – 14:56]

Post-break, Yasmin reconnects with Peter Alexander, NBC News’ chief White House correspondent, to discuss the U.S. administration's stance and strategy in response to Iran’s strikes.

Key Points Discussed:

• White House Deliberations: Peter outlines the ongoing high-level discussions within the White House, mentioning key figures like President Trump, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. “Those conversations have been happening throughout this day inside the White House” ([10:54]).

• Long-term Implications: Alexander emphasizes the uncertainty surrounding future actions, noting that responses could unfold over days, weeks, or even years. “This could last for days, weeks, months, or even years” ([11:15]).

• Battle Damage Assessments: He references National Security Analyst Jeremy Bash’s comment on the complexity of evaluating the damage and future steps: “This is going to be one of the most complex, maybe even contentious battle damage assessments that the US Intelligence community has ever had to undertake” ([12:19]).

• President Trump’s Leadership Style: Yasmin and Peter delve into President Trump’s approach, highlighting his emphasis on strength and historical impact. “The idea of strength presenting strength in any scenario over empathy, over, certainly over weakness” ([13:47]).

• Internal White House Dynamics: Peter describes a sense of camaraderie and pride within the White House, juxtaposed with the inherent risks of declaring triumph too early. “There was a pride. As this person said, the camaraderie on the president's team is very high” ([12:33]).

---

President Trump’s Strategy and Future Implications [13:37 – 14:56]

Further discussing the president's strategic mindset, Peter Alexander provides insights into how Trump views his actions within the broader context of his presidency.

Key Points Discussed:

• Historical Significance: While not necessarily seeking to be written into history books, Trump recognizes the historic nature of his decisions. “I'm certain that he recognizes the historic nature of what he would be doing” ([13:47]).

• Public Messaging: Trump’s public statements reflect his focus on demonstrating U.S. strength and his role in neutralizing threats. “The US took the bomb out from their very hands” ([13:47]).

• Strategic Calculations: Peter suggests that Trump’s actions are driven by a desire to assert dominance and prevent other administrations from taking decisive military action against Iran. “Each of the last four presidents... considered and chose not to” ([13:47]).

---

Additional Headlines and Highlights [14:56 – End]

In the concluding segments, Yasmin touches on other notable news stories to round out the episode.

Extreme Heatwave in the U.S.:

• Reports of soaring temperatures across the Midwest and Northeast, with heat index values reaching between 100 and 110 degrees.
• The EPA’s recommendation to set thermostats to 78 degrees for comfort and energy efficiency is humorously critiqued: “Comfort at 78, that is not cool. That is a slow, slow roast” ([15:26]).

Tribute to Fred Smith, Founder of FedEx:

• Yasmin commemorates the passing of Fred Smith at age 80, highlighting his pivotal role in revolutionizing global logistics.
• Smith’s gamble in 1974, where a $5,000 stake at a Vegas blackjack table turned into $27,000, is credited with saving FedEx from bankruptcy and spearheading its growth into a global empire.
• “His vision made fast, reliable delivery the standard and helped keep the modern world running on time” ([15:28]).

Closing Remarks:

• Yasmin wraps up the episode, thanking listeners and hinting at future topics. “That's going to do it for us. Thanks for joining me on our inaugural episode of here's the Scoop from NBC News” ([16:06]).

---

Notable Quotes:

• Richard Engel on Iran’s Intelligence:
  “It looks like Iran gave a heads up and it looks like even if they didn’t give one, that the Qataris had one. If the Qataris had one, the Americans had one.” ([01:24])

• Yasmin Vossoughian on Israel’s Objectives:
  “The objective of what Israel wants out of this thing, right?” ([05:01])

• Peter Alexander on White House Energy:
  “There was a pride. As this person said, the camaraderie on the president's team is very high.” ([12:33])

• Yasmin Vossoughian’s Commentary on the EPA’s Suggestion:
  “Comfort at 78, that is not cool. That is a slow, slow roast.” ([15:28])

---

Conclusion

In this first episode of “Here’s the Scoop,” Yasmin Vossoughian provides listeners with a comprehensive analysis of the escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran, Israel’s strategic maneuvers towards regime change, and insights into the White House’s response under President Trump. Additionally, the episode touches on domestic issues such as extreme weather conditions and commemorates the legacy of FedEx founder Fred Smith. With expert interviews and detailed discussions, the episode offers a thorough understanding of complex geopolitical dynamics and their broader implications.

Transcript

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Hey, everybody, I'm Yasmin Vesugian. You're listening to the first episode of here's the Scoop, the new daily podcast from NBC News to help you get caught up on the day's biggest stories. Enjoy the first episode. Hey, everybody, and welcome to our very first episode of here's the Scoop from NBC News, I'm Yasmin Vesugin and I'm your host. Today, every day on this show, we're gonna break down the biggest stories of the day and why they matter, tapping our network of reporters stationed all across the world to bring you the inside scoop today. Obviously, we gotta start with Iran. In striking Iran's nuclear facilities, Trump and his advisors said American involvement in the conflict was one and done. That's it. Iran, though, has now launched retaliatory strikes against US Forces stationed across the Mideast. The President a couple hours ago confirming that Iran gave them a heads up and thanking them for the advance notice. So what now? And what do the Israelis do? Our chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel is on the ground for us in Tel Aviv and has covered the region extensively. Hey, Richard, thanks for being here.

[Richard Engel]

It's great to be with you and I'm so happy to be part of your first broadcast. But I'm not really surprised. A lot is going on.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

So if we take a step back, Richard, for a moment, do you think this has changed the game or not? Because we're hearing that Iran essentially gave a heads up that the threat was imminent.

[Richard Engel]

It looks like Iran gave a heads up and it looks like even if they didn't give one, that the Qataris had one. If the Qataris had one, the Americans had one. They're co located in space. They worked together. But the reason why it seems clear that they had intelligence is before this attack took place, before these missiles were flying, the Qataris shut down the airspace, the Americans and British nationals, so civilians were told to shelter in place. And then the attack came. When you read the statements that the Iran Iranians put out, they were going out of their way to say this was not an attack on Qatar, that it was an attack on the American base, and that it was a proportionate reprisal to what they had received from the US Military. So they were trying to walk a very fine line saying we attacked a legitimate military target. After we were hit, the Iranians said they fired the same number of missiles on this base that the US Fired on their nuclear facilities. And then it was over. And then it went quiet. Nobody killed, nobody injured. They picked a Very hard target. There's no way that these missiles were probably gonna get through there anyway. They picked the hardest target in the Middle east and fired a limited number of missiles at it. If this brings us into a giant war in the Middle east and if this is the trigger, well, it seems like it would be a wild miscalculation.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

You know, it's interesting because this is somewhat similar to what happened after the killing of the IRGC head, Qasem Soleimani.

[Celeste]

Celeste.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

They went after a US Air base in Iraq, even less so. And so with that in mind, I'm thinking here that the Iranians are essentially saying, and especially the Iranian government is essentially saying, our hands are up. We're not going to win this thing. We don't want to look weak in the region, so we're doing this, but let's back off.

[Richard Engel]

So this. This attack, I think you can really describe it as symbolic. And it was probably designed to send a message to the Iranian. Not so much the Iranian people, but to other regional powers and also to the regime itself. You know, they're. Military commanders are being targeted left, right, and center. The Internet is out in Iran. Every time a new general steps up, there's a risk that he is going to be assassinated. The Israelis have been saying, you better not take these new jobs as we're killing top commanders. You better not fill their vacancies. So the Iranians needed to show some strength. Otherwise, there's a risk that their entire security apparatus could just fade away and no damage, no. No deaths, no injuries. So maybe this is an opportunity. They sent their message. Nobody got hurt, nobody got killed. They said, okay, they've balanced the books in their mind, fine, maybe. Maybe we can go to negotiations. And that, by the way, was the first response from the Ministry of Foreign affairs in Qatar. They said they were all shot down, nobody hurt. It's over. Now it's time for cessation of hostilities. Let's go to talks.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

So what I think, though, Richard, that is really interesting of what's happening amidst all of this, is Israel is continuing to fire on Iran. And the places they are targeting is incredibly interesting. One of them being Evin Prison, which is essentially in the middle of Tehran. It is where political dissidents are held. And they. They targeted it in a way in which the prisoners were not harmed. They were actually released. They were able to leave the prison. And so to me, that says, as you're kind of looking at what it is that Israel wants out of this thing, right? The objective of what Israel wants And ultimately the United States as well, is, if you have political dissonance pouring into the streets of Tehran, that that is essentially Israel wanting regime change, wanting the people to rise up.

[Richard Engel]

And what you just said, I think there was a little sub. You listened closely. What you said is what Israel wants and what the US Wants. I'm not sure they necessarily see eye to eye, and I'm not sure that they have the exact same agenda here. So President Trump and his administration have kind of tried to thread this needle that they want regime change. But Trump says, well, maybe what's wrong with regime change if it's a bad regime? But the most consistent line is that they don't want regime change. They want to attack the nuclear facilities. The Israelis have been saying that, but their actions don't match that. They've been attacking the Iranian military leadership on a daily basis. The Israeli defense minister said that the Iran's supreme leader should no longer be allowed to exist. They have been carrying out these new attacks, attacks that you're talking about against what they're calling centers of Iranian repression. So they attacked the Aveen prison, hitting the door, being political prisoners, although the Iranians said they regained control of the prison, hitting the Basij. Now, the Basij is a domestic security force of the Revolutionary Guard that is generally used to carry out repression to keep the people in line. Police headquarters has been hit. And this is. I think you could only describe this as a tool of regime change. You're trying to take away the tools that the Iranian state uses to keep itself in power.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

So that said, Richard, did Iran blink today? And if in fact they did, how does Israel respond, considering what we think their objective is?

[Richard Engel]

So that, I think, is the bingo question here. They blink to a degree. I mean, they hit a hard target that they had really no chance in a world of doing much damage to. Now, where does it go from here? I don't know. Is President Trump going to use this as a pretense to clobber them? Will the Israelis stop? There's mixed messages. Prime Minister Netanyahu just said today that we're kind of getting to the end of our objectives. We're not going to stop early, but we're heading toward a conclusion. The official objectives that Israel has laid out for itself are not regime change and are not killing the ayatollah and not doing the succession for them. It is to eliminate the nuclear threat and to eliminate the ballistic missile threat. If Israel can say in a couple of days, it's done that, and Iran can say that it's responded. Maybe we can back off from the brink.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Richard Engel, my friend, I appreciate you jumping on with us amidst this breaking news. We'll be talking to you again very soon. I'm sure of it. Be safe.

[Richard Engel]

Great to be with you. Thanks.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Thank you, Richard. All right. We are going to take a quick break. When we come back, we're going to go inside the White House.

[Peter Alexander]

Today is the worst day of Abby's life. The 17 year old cradles her newborn son in her arms.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

They all saw how much I loved him.

[Peter Alexander]

They didn't have to take him from me. Between 1940, 1945, in the early 1970s, families shipped their pregnant teenage daughters to maternity homes and forced them to secretly place their babies for adoption in hidden corners across America. It's still happening. My parents had me locked up in the godparent home against my will. They worked with them to manipulate me and to steal my son away from me. The godparent home is the brainchild of controversial prisoners, preacher Jerry Falwell, the father of the modern evangelical right and the founder of Liberty University, where powerful men emboldened by their faith determine who gets to be a parent and who must give their child away. Follow Liberty Lost on the Wondery app or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Celeste]

DATELINE True Crime Weekly. Andrea Canning and the DATELINE team cover breaking crime news around the country. And now a special series with daily updates from the trial of Sean Combs.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

I'll be talking to NBC News correspondent Chloe Meloss every day after court about what she's seeing inside, the witnesses, the evidence and what it all means.

[Celeste]

DATELINE True Crime Weekly. Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts.

[Unknown]

This was a Saturday night in Tacoma, Washington.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

So we get our shoes and we go to our lanes.

[Unknown]

Theresa Chepesky was there with two of her daughters, her boyfriend, some family and some friends.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

And Tika sees the video games.

[Unknown]

Tika was Teresa's two year old.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

It was my turn to bowl and I told my brother and my boyfriend, make sure you watch Tika so nothing happens to her.

[Unknown]

Her attention was diverted for maybe 15 seconds and something did happen.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

She was gone.

[Unknown]

The search for Tika began that night and it still is not over.

[Celeste]

Maybe you could be the key to solving her case. DATELINE Missing in America, available wherever you get your podcasts, listen now.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Hey, everybody. Yasmin Vasugian here. And we're back with here's the scoop from NBC News. The White House is now weighing how to respond to Iran's retaliatory strikes. We've got our chief White House correspondent Peter Alexander with us. Hi, Peter.

[Unknown]

Hi, Yasmin. Thanks for having me.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Thanks for being with us. I was just speaking with Richard Engel on the ground in Tel Aviv, and he's kind of framing this thing as if Iran blinked, giving a heads up, according to some of his reporting, before they launched on this US Air base. With all that in mind, the question is now, how is the US Going to respond? What are you hearing from inside the White House?

[Unknown]

Well, we know those conversations have been happening throughout this day inside the White House. The president meeting in the Situation Room, monitoring the situation at those air bases throughout the region with Dan Cain, the Joint Chiefs chairman, Marco Rubio, his Secretary of State, Pete Hegseth, of course, the Secretary of Defense, and obviously the Vice President, J.D. vance as well. So in some ways, it's a bit of a waiting game. But I think among the questions that Richard touches on is how much of this by Iran was, in effect, performative to demonstrate for domestic political consumption in Iran. Look, we're firing back. We have the capabilities. We are going after the Americans here. The idea that the Iranians would have tipped off Qatar, that shared it with the US Would make sense through that lens. Separately, though, I don't think anybody can say with any certitude that that would be the end of the story here. Right. Perhaps the initial retaliation might happen within 48 to 72 hours, but this could last from everyone I've been speaking to for days, weeks, months, or even years here. And among the real questions, where is the highly enriched uranium? Can the US Say with certainty that that was destroyed as a function of this right now? Jeremy Bash, one of our national security analysts, said something that I thought was so striking. He said that this is going to be one of the most complex, maybe even contentious battle damage assessments that the US Intelligence community has ever had to undert.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Peter, you and I spoke before this retaliation from Iran, and you painted this picture of the White House being triumphant today after the strikes over the weekend at the nuclear sites. What is the sense inside the White House now?

[Unknown]

It's a good question that that idea of them being triumphant, the words initially that came from Keith Kellogg, one of the president's top advisors, who was partly in charge of the efforts to find a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. He posted today saying in parts of the West Wing and the Executive Office building places that I can't get that. There was a, quote, different feel, as he described it, this sense of a triumph here, like a sports team after winning a championship. And I brought this up to some of the White House officials with whom I was speaking, and they were, I think, a little bit sensitive to this idea of we're triumphant. But you can see, you can feel it in the energy that is in parts of the White House right now. This individual said, you know, we do have this real sense that we were a part of history, in effect, in what we did. There was a pride. As this person said, the camaraderie on the president's team is very high. But, you know, those are risky words because it was a historic moment. And the best case scenario is it was successful. All American service members came home safely. The question is, what happens now? What happens in the days, weeks and months ahead?

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Peter, you covered this president extensively. Do you think part of his calculation deciding to strike Iran over the weekend was becoming a part of the history books?

[Unknown]

I don't know that it's a function of the president wanting to be a part of the history books, although I'm certain that he recognizes the historic nature of what he would be doing for the president. There is sort of one image, one word that matters most to him, and that's the idea of strength, presenting strength in any scenario over empathy, over, certainly over weakness. And here, given the opportunity to sort of, you know, to do something that no president before him had done, each of the last four presidents, Bush, Clinton, Obama, Biden had all considered and chose not to do the. I'm certain that that played some role in the president's decision making here, and I'm certain that he, as evidenced by what we're hearing from him even overnight, touting on social media, taunting the Iranians, saying, in effect, the US Took the bomb out from their very hands. The president likes the idea that he was, you know, that this was a master plan that he came with in his eyes and that it demonstrates in his view, his strength.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Peter Alexander, for those that cannot see, providing a bit of levity for us with your teal headphones, we appreciate you, my friend.

[Unknown]

A hat tip to my daughters.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

Thank you. Thank you, Peter. And before we go, a few headlines. Why is it when it's too cold, you want hot and when it's too hot, you want cold? That is what many Americans and me are dreaming of today. From the Midwest to the Northeast, Mother Nature is turning up the heat and half the country is feeling it. Some areas could hit heat index values between 100 and 110 degrees.

[Unknown]

Really hot.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

The fans are all on high. And just as the scorching heat Wave turns the US into a giant toaster oven. The EPA has a suggestion. Set your thermostat to 78 degrees when you wake up for comfort and efficiency. Comfort at 78, that is not cool. That is a slow, slow roast. So while the agency insists it's going to help lower energy bills and save the planet, Americans everywhere have a persistent upper lip sweat just sitting in their living room.

[Richard Engel]

That's why every FedEx office has a.

[Unknown]

Clock, because we live or we die by the clock.

[Yasmin Vesugian]

So that's Tom Hanks in the movie Castaway. Why did we play that clip? Well, if you remember, in the movie, besides the whole stranded on an island thing, Hanks worked for Federal Express. Well, FedEx founder Fred Smith, who revolutionized global logistics, has died at 80 years old. Smith didn't just build a company. He reinvented how the world moves. What began as a Yale term paper outlining a novel overnight delivery system became FedEx, a global logistics empire renowned for its efficiency and its pioneering hub and spoke network that fundamentally transformed shipping. The path to success was far from smooth. Rumor has that in 1974, with FedEx facing imminent bankruptcy, Smith took the company's last $5,000 to Vegas. His gamble at the blackjack table netted $27,000, a sum that famously kept the company's planes in the air during that critical period. Smith then ushered in a new era of global commerce. His vision made fast, reliable delivery the standard and helped keep the modern world running on time. And speaking of time, we're out of it. That's going to do it for us. Thanks for joining me on our inaugural episode of here's the Scoop from NBC News. I'm Yasmin Vesugin. We'll see you tomorrow with whatever the day may bring.