If you're actively doing the research and design required to build a nuclear weapon, and you're enriching uranium for the purpose of building a nuclear weapon, you have a nuclear weapons program. Whether you're actually physically assembling one immediately or not.

You wouldn't argue that the Manhattan Project wasn't a "real" nuclear weapons program until they started physically building the prototype.

I think our discussion hinges on the definition of "program". I agree that Iran was attempting to reduce its breakout time.

"doing the research and design required to build a nuclear weapon" ... "enriching uranium for the purpose of building a nuclear weapon"

Gabbard says "Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and is unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons," but if there was knowledge they were actually building a nuclear weapon, she would have said so.

I could believe, but haven't seen claimed, that Iran was doing R&D in order to shorten the time between deciding they want an atomic bomb and having one completed. Or perhaps to have a second-order deterrent ("we could make a bomb") not a first order deterrent ("we have a bomb"). I think it's a big difference from actually trying to make one. Maybe you disagree on that point.