a news conference in any moment now. he is expected to give information on the iran deal and we will bring it to you live. chairman yellen -- chairwoman yellen finishing up testimony. mark: the greek parliament voting on a bailout plan that would keep country in the eurozone, but also impose tough austerity measures. ♪ betty: a lot for the markets to check on. i'm betty liu here with mark crumpton. onwant to get here with ramy how the markets have reacted to the headlines. ramy: good afternoon to you. markets across the board are all flat. that is the word over the past few hours. we are going into the third hour

now of chairma chairwoman yellen's testimony. it adow and nasdaq only 10th of a percent higher which is nothing at all. they are in session lows at about 2.36%. there have been holding earlier close to the baseline until chair yellen started speaking at 10:15 a.m. and we have seen that slide lower. over to the dollar and they are the opposite. they are trading in the highs of the day. they are near the two week high. at 8:30 a.m. when the first fed remarks were brought, it jumped higher. it is now $97.20. some individual stock movers. chipotle is on the radar. the big influence is because of jeffrey dunlop. capitale double line chief investment officer.

he spoke at a conference as he said he could take a short sell off of chipotle mexican grill. he says they are remarkably overvalued and they could exit the company wants performance starts to be better. i want to take you to delta. he also wants to take his shares off of that company. he also said that he recently bought shares in those were moving higher. the only negative is that there are no buybacks. you can see that sharp spike. i throw it back to you guys, he said that despite what chair yellen said earlier today, he himself takes that there will be no fed rate rise to this year. we will have to wait and see. betty:betty: he said that several times in the last few weeks that he does not believe in what yellen is anchored -- is saying. mark: that is clearly what she is saying. betty: read my lips -- we are raising. we are standing by for president

obama to hold a news conference at the white house on the historic nuclear agreement with iran. the battle of the deal has shifted from dni to capitol hill. by's president joe biden spent with house democrats to brief them on the court. he told them that there is nothing in the agreement that takes the military option off the table. negotiators say the agreement would prevent iran from building a nuclear weapon. congress has 60 days to review the agreement. president obama says that islamic is pass a resolution rejecting the deal, he will veto it. we will go to the president live on bloomberg when that happens. mark: benjamin netanyahu is stepping up his criticism of that nuclear deal between the united states and iran. the prime minister says that israel has a great and mighty andngth to defend itself that his nation will not be bound by the agreement. the prime minister's political rival says he is coming to the u.s. to lobby for a compensation package to maintain israel's military

advantage in the region. in greece, the parliament votes today on a deal that will determine whether the country will accept the bailout. s will have to count on members of the opposition to get the package through. this led to a result in the prime minister's own party. it is obvious to most of you that this is the difficult part and it does in fact have many anments that will have effect. there are many reforms that continue the neoliberal direct and will affect growth of many social groups in an impressionable way. meanwhile, the european banks will make a decision on liquidity for greek banks tomorrow. that is according to a person familiar with the matter. this after the imf warned the eurozone that greece needs more debt relief. a new report questions whether greece can deliver those economic reforms without debt restructuring.

says: bank of america profits have more than doubled. expenses fell to the lowest level since 2008. for the most part, the bank has put its legal and mortgage troubles behind it. the cost of servicing by a portfolio drop by 37%. and delta airlines plans to do something about falling airfares. delta will cut growth and seating capacity to its slowest rate in more than a. andysts have been urging wants to rein in capacity to strengthen price of power. -- pricing power. janet yellen spent the morning meeting with the house panel on the state of the u.s. economy. she says that she sees a number of encouraging signs of the economy is reviving. if the improvements continued, the central bank will rightly start raising interest rates this year. we wait longer, it

certainly could mean that when we begin to raise rates that we might have to do so more rapidly. so an advantage to beginning a little bit earlier is that we gradual pathmore of rate increases. mark: chair yellen adds the importance of the first rate hike should not be overemphasized because interest rates will likely remain at a low level for quite some time after the first increase. betty: for more on the testimony, that is get to julie hyman who is standing by on capitol hill where the session has just wrapped up. julie. julie: there were a few surprises in today's testimony and even in the ensuing q and a session in which she gave that reply that you just heard a moment ago. emphasizing once again that she believes it is unlikely that we will see -- likely we will see one increase this year, but is

not something that the fed is wedded to. she did not say the words, but it was implicit in her testimony when she talked about the strength of the employment market and still has some slack in it. it is still not to the fed's target. we got perhaps the most heated exchange having nothing to do with monetary policy, but rather inalleged leak that happened 2012 when advisory firm released a report the day before the fed minutes that had the content of that minutes within it. the members of this committee have been trying to get some documents from janet yellen and from the federal reserve that she has resented -- was this a giving. sean tuffy from wisconsin and the most pointed exchange with the fed chair talked about the fed being intransigent in this regard. >> if anyone is trying to sweep this under the rug, it is the fed. i sent you a letter in response to the demaio -- denial on the

17th of june. we have almost a full page of footnotes where congress has done oversights during an open pending doj prosecution. we have the rights to these documents. you have the duty to provide up to us. have cited no legal authority to deny that request. we are entitled to do oversight. you are required to give the documents. i hope you will reconsider your denial. julie: that was probably the most heated moment. her reply was that they started this investigation into the matter by the department of justice. continues,estigation she will not turn over for documentation to the house financial services committee. once the investigation is complete, she will do that. other than that, not a lot of fireworks today. lessepublicans perhaps pointed in the questioning generally that some might have expected. that chair yellen stressed

her economic output going forward is based on improvements and improvements in the labor market and expectation that the employment will move closer to the target. where any members expecting concern about the inflation outlook? tooe: they did not seem concerned about that output specifically. they seem more concerned in the fuestioning of her that i there is a downturn coming, the fed will not have tools in their arsenal to combat that because we are at the baseline in terms of interest rate. should there be some kind of trouble economically, can the fed cut rates? we have seen diminishing returns in quantitative easing. not necessarily any tools in the toolbox on that front. there was some concern in that regard. betty: there were some heated

moments as you showed us with congressman duffy. also moments of the will demand over -- b will limit over charts being -- d will permit over charts being shown. --re you surprised that the were you surprised that the tone? was it not as heated as you expected? julie: it was perhaps less what exchange you besides that duffy exchange and some of the questions about what the fed might be able to do if the economy turns down in some way. i did want to mention the comments, not necessarily in her testimony, but she did talk about it a little bit in her q&a, but from the monetary policy report that the company that is hearing today, interesting commentary on the bond market liquidity. as we know, we have heard lisa talked frequently about this as concernthat there is among fixed income investors about liquidity out there in

this environment. the fed said in its report today that a variety of efforts do not suggest a deterioration in day-to-day liquidity. it points to less resilient liquidity's. the fed is aware of this issue. it does say that if we see a sudden jump and long-term rates that there might be large redemptions that amplify volatility. they say that the risk of fire sales is mitigated to some extent by lower leverage that we have seen now in the financial system. she did speak today about the higher capital requirements incumbent upon the banks now under dodd-frank and other regulations that have made the financial system safer compared with pre-financial crisis. betty: julie, thank you so by for standing with us. standing by with us. still ahead, president obama will be holding his press conference at the white house moments from now. mark: he will bring it to you live.

stay with us. you are watching "bloomberg market day. " ♪

welcome back. i'm betty liu. i'm here with mark crumpton. let us look at the top stories crossing the terminal at this hour. it is amazon prime they did those that pay $99 for the privilege are shopping for bargains on the site. before a single sale is made, the company shareholders are already winners. the stock closed at a record high $5 billion in the pocket of amazon shareholders. notcompany's market value $217 billion. families will not spend as much as usual on back-to-school shopping. the national retail federation

is producing a 5.8% drop in spending. viewed thesually back-to-school season as an indicator for the holiday shopping rush. it is the end of an era here in new york. schwarzt toy store fao is closing its doors. the brand will not have a retail presence for the first time in 153 years. the store lease is expiring and the landlord won a much higher rent. the store's owner may reopen the store next year, but it is just not the same. it's an iconic location. mark: you said that several times in the morning newsroom. made it famous in he played the piano, but they may open in another location. switching gears -- greece's parliament handling debates on whether they can handle the bailout plan, while imf officials said that the deal may not be enough.

bloomberg is in athens for us. david, from what we understand, getting a little heated. protest fairlyne small on the steps of parliament. it was rather quiet throughout the day. here in the last hour or so, many protesters have descended upon the square. more police presence than i've seen since i've been here. police officers with a lot of right gear. connecting tot athens has been closed. cars and buses have been rerouted. we understand it is a protest of the last in artists -- and are kissing communist. this seriouslyng as the debate continues. the plenary session is underway. this is what prime minister tsipras agreed to. a vote is expected in a few hours. we know it could go well into the evening. betty: david, it is betty here.

give us more of a sense of what is likely to play out. we may not get results until the early morning hour, right? yeah, what we are building up to hear inside of the parliament is this each by prime minister tsipras. after that, the parliament will vote. we heard a lot of speeches from members of parliament. the former prime minister gave a speech. he has been very vocal about this deal, coming out against the deal, issuing an annotated version of the deal on his website and taking the prime minister and his government to task for it. that theeard today party issued a statement in the members said that they were opposed to the plan. that is not binding. not comprise slowly of members of parliament. we are waiting for the trimester to do his first interview and he had very strong words for the creditors.

they said they were vengeful and took germany to task in particular. he pointed to the plan and explained why he agreed to what the european union amanda. mark: you mentioned that a lot of lawmakers are expected to dissent and the deal is it expected to pass from the pro-european opposition party. afteripras survived this all is said and done? david: i had a conversation from a member of the centrist party who has aligned with the prime minister for this foe. he is very sure the bill does going to pass by asking about the future prospects. he says it was too early to tell. effort of goodme faith of part of the prime minister and it is too early to say how long that will pass. betty: if it does not pass, what sort of immediate impact might we see?

has gained that out yet, betty. the consensus is that it will pass. if it does pass, this is very much a bandage and paves the way for more talks for what will happen in regards to greece's financial future. the consensus seems to be that we will have debate well into the evening. there is the support that they need to pass this agreement that he has agreed to with the european union. the politics of this cannot be overstated or understated. we have mentioned now for the past several days. tsipras ran on a platform of anti-austerity and now he is telling people that he understands that the measures he agreed to went against the pledges he made during the election. theou have a sense on ground there how people feel about the deal that was cut between prime ministers tsipras creditors?ernational

david: opinions are mixed. state his interview on television, he spoke about raising the sales tax could is something that he said was a rational, but also something he had to do. people i talked to on the streets say that a lot of them do support the prime minister. they are less supportive of his government and his cabinet. they would like to see that cabinet reshuffle they did. we have seen that start to happen with the deputy foreign minister resigning. today, the deputy finance minister resigned as well. we are seeing a change of the terrain there. those who do support him are very proud of the fact that he stood up for greece. they see germany as not being empathetic to the people here in greece. by a large, that is what i've been hearing down on the streets talking to the people on the streets running shops and small businesses. they are really being crunched by the fact that these capital controls are still in place.

they do not have access to the banks. those remain close. they will remain closed at least through tomorrow. gur joining us live froma athens greece. in thiss lost conversation is that the greek people are suffering. inre is a fascinating report "the new york times" this past weekend about how the greek people have an going to homeless shelters. how they have been going to waiting on the street to get something to eat. the human toll on this cannot be understated. it is just tragedy. betty: there was video of the elderly gentleman who is trying to get his money out of the greek banks and he essentially just collapsed at the end and begin crying because he had gone to 45 banks. it just sort of brought home the devastation there. we're going to have much more on "bloomberg market day." where turning our attention to president obama holding a news conference at the white house in

moments. we will bring it to you live coming up. ♪

betty: welcome back. i'm betty liu here with mark crumpton. we have been standing by for the president of the united states. let's go to church screen -- josh green and mark halperin. rk: mark halperin along with josh green in new york. we are going to go live to present obama and the white house. the main topic will be the deal just struck with iran and discussing the deal that could a man on a mission with a very clear objective it let us go to margaret. what is the president trying to economist today. today -- to a couples accomplished today?

margaret: he is trying to hold this deal through congress to keep this deal and tech. we are waiting for the president to come in a moment. margaret mentioned capitol hill. where do you think the president is trying to target his message to republicans or democrats are both? josh: mainly democrats. i'm sure he would love to have some republicans, even a andblican, get on board make this more evident bipartisan effort. publicn goal is shaping perception of this and keeping this together. should beead of what a loud and contentious presidential debate. josh: here's the president. pres. obama: yesterday was a historic day. and, hence of long-term deal that we had achieved with our allies and partners to prevent

iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon represents a powerful display of american leadership and diplomacy. it shows what we can accomplish when we lead from a position of strength in a position of principal. when we unite the international community around a shared vision and we resolved to solve problems peacefully. yesterday, it is important for the american people and congress to get a full opportunity to review this deal. that process is now underway. i have already reached out to leaders in congress on both sides of the aisle. my national security team has begun offering extensive briefings. i expect the debate to be robust and that is how it should be. it is an important issue. our national security policies are more effective and stronger when they are subject to the scrutiny of transparency that democracy demands. as i said yesterday, the details of this deal matter very much. that is why our team worked so hard and for so long to get the

details right. , as this debate unfolds, i hope we do not lose sight of the larger picture. the opportunity that this agreement represents. as we go forward, it is important for everybody to remember the alternative, the fundamental choice that this moment represents. off everydeal, we cut single one of iran's pathways to a nuclear program, a nuclear weapons program. and iran's nuclear program will be under severe limits for many years. without a deal, those pathways remain open. there would be no limits to iran's nuclear program and iran could move closer to a nuclear bomb. gainthis deal, we unprecedented around-the-clock monitoring of iran's key nuclear

facilities and he must copperheads of an intrusive inspection and verification regime ever negotiated. without a deal, those inspections go away. and we lose the ability to closely monitor iran's program and detect any covert nuclear weapons program. with this deal, if iran follow violates his commitments, there will be real consequences. nuclear related sanctions that have crippled the iranian economy. back into place for you without a deal, the international sanctions regime will unravel. there will be no ability to reimpose them. with this deal, we have the possibility of peacefully resolving a major threat to regional and international security. without a deal, we risk even more war in the middle east and other countries in the region pursueeel compelled to their own user programs, threatening a nuclear arms race

and the most volatile region and the world. as i said yesterday, even with this deal, we will continue to have found differences with iran. it support of terrorism, its use of profits to destabilize parts of the middle east. therefore, the multilateral arms embargo on a man will remain in place for an additional five years and restrictions on ballistic missiles technology will remain for eight years. in addition, the united states will maintain our own sanctions related to iran's support of terrorism, its ballistic missile program, its human rights violations, and will continue our unprecedented security cooperation with israel and continue to deepen our partnerships with the gulf states. -- the bottom line is this this nuclear deal meets the national security interest of the united states and our allies. it prevents the most serious -- iran obtaining a

nuclear weapon, which would only make the other problems that iran may cause even worse. that is why this deal makes our country and the why the alternative, no limits on iran's nuclear program, no inspections, and iran is closer to a nuclear weapon, the risk of a greater nuclear arms race and a greater risk of war, all of that would endanger our security. that is the choice we face. if we do not choose wisely, i believe future generations will judge us harshly for letting this moment slip away, and no one suggests this deal resolves all of the threats iran poses to its neighbors or the world. the promise of this deal will require many years of implementation and hard work. it will require vigilance and execution. is our best means

of assuring iran does not get a nuclear weapon, and from the start, that has been my number one priority, our number one priority. we have got a historic chance to pursue a safer and more secure world, an opportunity that may not come again in our lifetimes lifetimes. as president and commander in chief, i'm going to seize that opportunity, and we will take some questions and see who i am starting off with. hmm. here you go. i got it. [laughter] afp.dent obama: andrew, president.u, mr. yesterday, you said the deal offered a chance of a new direction in relations with iran. what steps will you take to

enable a more moderate iran, and does this deal allow you to more forcefully counter iran's destabilizing actions in the region? president obama: thank you. not mind, just because i suspect that there is going to be a common set of questions that are touched on, i promise i will get to your question, but i want to start off just by stepping back and reminding folks of what is at stake here, and i already did in my opening's david, but i just want to reiterate, because i have heard already some of the objections to the deal. of ourrting premise strategy with respect to iran that it would be a grave threat to the united states and to our allies if they obtained a nuclear weapon. everything we have done

over the last six and a half years has been designed to make sure that we address that number one priority. sanctionsat the regime was all about. that is how we were able to mobilize the international community, including some folks that we are not particularly theseto, to abide by sanctions. that is how these crippling sanctions came about, that we were able to gain global consensus that iran having a nuclear weapon would be a problem for everybody. iran's the reason that accounts got frozen and that they were not able to get money for the oil sales that they made. that is the reason they had trouble operating with international commerce, because we told that international consensus around this narrow but profound issue. the possibility of iran getting a nuclear weapon.

and, by the way, that was not simply my priority. theou look back at all of debates that have taken place over the last 5, 6 years, this has been a democratic priority. this has been a republican priority. this has been prime minister priority, is making sure iran does not get a nuclear weapon. negotiated by john kerry and wendy sherman and our allies, our partners, the p5 goal.ne achieves that our top priority, making sure that iran does not , but weclear weapon have always recognized that even if iran does not get a nuclear poses, iran still

challenges to our interests and our values, both in the region , so whend the world this deal gets implemented, we know that we will have the immediate concerns around iran's nuclear program pit we will have brought their stockpiles down to 98%. we will significantly have reduced the number of centrifuges they operate. we will have installed an unprecedented inspections regime, and that will remain in place him and not just for 10 example, on the stockpiles will continue until 15 years. iran will have pledged to the international community that it will not develop a nuclear weapon and now will be subject to an additional protocol, a

inspection and monitoring regime that lasts in perpetuity. disabled a facility like iraq, the iraq facility, from allowing iran to develop plutonium that could be used for a bomb. we will have greatly reduced the stockpile of uranium that is , and we will have put in place inspections along the so that ifly chain the uranium was diverted into a covert program, we would catch say withcan confidence, but more importantly, nuclear experts can say with confidence that iran will not be in a position to develop a nuclear bomb. we will have met our number one

priority. now. we will still have priorities sponsorship of terrorism, it's funding of thates, like hezbollah threaten the region, the destabilizing activities that they are engaged in in places , and my hope is that building on this deal, we can continue to have conversations themiran that incentivize to behave differently in the aggressive,e less less hostile, more cooperative, thaterate the way we nations in the international community to behave, but we are not counting on it, so this deal is not contingent on iran changing its behavior. it is not contingent on iran

suddenly operating like a liberal democracy. it solves one particular problem, which is making sure they do not have a bomb, and the point i have repeatedly made and i believe is hard to dispute is that it will be a lot easier for us to check iran's nefarious activities, to push back against the other areas where they operate contrary to our interests or to our allies' int erests if they do not have a bomb, and so, will they change their behavior? seek to gain more cooperation from them in resolving issues like syria or what is happening in iraq, to stop encouraging items in it yemen?

that unlike the cuba situation, we are not normalizing diplomatic relations, so the contacts will continue to be limited, but will he try to encourage them to take a more constructive path? of course, but we are not betting on it, and, in fact, having resolved to the nuclear issue, we will be in a stronger position to work with israel, work with the gulf countries, work with our other countries, work with the european to bring additional pressure to bear on iran around those issues that remain of concern, but the argument that i have been already hearing, and this was foreshadowed to the deal was because thisat deal does not solve all of those that that is an argument for rejecting this deal . that defies logic. it makes no sense. sight of what was

our original number-one priority, which is making sure that they do not have the om -- bomb. john? >> mr. president, does it give you any pause to see this deal praised by the saudi dictator as a great victory for iran or praised by those in tehran, who america!"t, "death to and here in congress, it looks like a large majority will vote to reject this deal, and i know you can reject that, that the majority of the people's representatives in congress saying this is a bad deal, and if i can just ask you a quick political question, a very quick 1 -- obama: let me answer the question that you asked. it does not give me pause that

or others in tehran may be to spin the deal in a way they think is favorable to what their constituencies want to hear. that is what politicians do. the casehas been throughout. i mean, you will recall that during the course of these negotiations over the last couple of months, every time the supreme leader or somebody tweeted something out, for some reason, we all bought into the notion that the obama administration must be giving this or capitulating to that. document, sohave a you can see what the deal is. we do not have to speculate or engage in spin. you can just read what it says or what is required, and nobody has disputed that as a consequence of this agreement, iran has to drastically reduce its stockpiles of uranium, or is

, theff from plutonium facility that is underground is anverted that we have unprecedented inspections regime, that we have snapped back provisions if they cheat, and the facts are the facts. and i and not concerned about what others say about it. congress,respect to my hope -- i will not prejudge this. my hope is that everyone in congress also evaluates this agreement based on the facts, not on politics, not on posturing, not on the fact that this is a deal that i bring to congress as opposed to a republican president, not based whatbbying, but based on

is in the national interests of the united states of america, and i think if congress does that, then, in fact, based on the facts, the majority of congress should approve of this deal, but we live in washington, and politics do in trade, and, as i said in an interview yesterday, i am not betting on the republican party rallying behind this agreement. debate to behe based on facts and not ,peculation or misinformation and that i welcome. .n part because, look there are legitimate, real concerns here. we have already talked about it. we have huge differences with iran. has legitimate concerns

about its security relative to iran. with ae a large country significant military that has shouldmed that israel not exist, that has denied the holocaust, that has financed hezbollah, and as a consequence, there are missiles that are , anded towards tel aviv so, i think they are very good reasons why israelis are nervous position in the world, generally, and i have said it directly to present netanyahu and to the israeli but what i have also said is that all of those threats are compounded if iran , and forclear weapon

all of the objections of prime minister netanyahu, or, for that matter, some of the republican leadership that has already spoken -- none of them have presented to me or the american alternative.er i am hearing a lot of talking points being repeated about this is a bad deal. this is a historically that deal . this will threaten israel and threaten the world, threaten the united states. i mean, there has been a lot of that. , what have not heard is is your preferred alternative? communitythe world and the majority of nuclear experts look at this thing, and they say this will prevent iran from getting a nuclear bomb, and

you are arguing either that it does not or that even if it does, it is temporary, or that because they are going to get a of their accounts being unfrozen that they will cause shouldoblems, then you have some alternative to present, and i have not heard that, and the reason is because twoe really are only alternatives here. either the issue of iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation, or it is resolved .hrough force, through war those are the options. now, you will hear some critics say, well, we could have negotiated a better deal. ok. what does that mean? i think the suggestion among a

lot of the critics has been that a better deal, an acceptable deal, would be one in which iran has no nuclear capacity at all, peaceful or otherwise. the problem with that position is that there is nobody who thinks that iran would or could ever accept that, and the international community does not take the view that iran cannot have a peaceful nuclear program. they agree with us that iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. and so, we do not have diplomatic leverage to eliminate of a peaceful nuclear program in iran. what we do have the leverage to do is to make sure they do not have a weapon. that is exactly what we have

done. so to go back to congress, i challenge those who are objecting to this agreement, number one to read the agreement before they comment on it, number two to explain specifically where it is that they think this agreement does not prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and why they are right and people like an mit nuclear physicist and expert in this issue is wrong, why the rest of the world is wrong, and then present an alternative, and if the alternative is that we elould bring iran to he through military force, then that would be an honest debate. >> prime minister netanyahu said

you could have a situation where iran can delay 24 days -- president obama: i am happy to -- that is a good example, the let's take the issue of 24 days. this has been, i think, swirling today, the notion that this is insufficient in terms of inspections. now, keep in mind, first of all, that we will have 20 47 inspections-- 24/7 of the mines, known to produce centrifuges, parts. that entire infrastructure that we know about, we will have monitoring of24/7 those facilities. than the issue is, what if they try to develop a covert program? advantages ofe having inspections across the entire production chain is that

it makes it very difficult to set up a corporate program -- covert program. there are only so many uranium mines in iraq, and, in fact, we are counting the amount of uranium that is being mined, and suddenly some is missing on the 'sp end, they have got some laining to do. track alongle to the existing facilities to make sure there is not diversion into but let's sayam, that iran is so determined that it now wants to operate covertly . the iaea, the international charged with implementing the nonproliferation treaty and monitoring nuclear activities in countries around the world, the iaea will have the ability to

sites, wendeclared are concerned about. we see something suspicious. will be able to say to iran, "we went to go inspect that." objects, we can override it. in the agreement, we can override iran's objection, and we do not need russia or china in order for us to get that override, and if they continue to object, we're in a position sanctions and declare that iran is in .iolation of the treaty as for the fact that it may take 24 days to finally get access to the site, the nature of nuclear programs and facilities is such -- this is not something you hide in a closet.

something you put on a dolly and we'll off somewhere somewhere, and, by the way, if there is a suspicious site, we are going to es on it, so we will be monitoring activity, and that will be something that will be evidenced, if we think there is some funny business going on there that we can present to the international community, so we will be monitoring that the entire time, and, by the way, if there is nuclear material on , your high school physics will remind us that that , and so we will know that, in fact, there was a violation of the agreement, so the point is, jonathan, that this is the most vigorous

inspection and verification regime by far that has ever been negotiated. is it possible that iran decides to try to cheat, despite having this entire inspection verification mechanism? possible, but if it does, first of all, we built in a one-year breakout time, which gives us a year to respond forcefully, and we have built in donap that provisions, so we not have to go through lengthy discussions with the u.s. to put sanctions back in place, and so really the only argument you can make against the verification and inspection mechanism that we is that iran is so intent on obtaining a nuclear regimethat no inspection and no verification mechanism would be sufficient, because

they find some way to get around it because they are untrustworthy, and if that is your view, then we go back to the choice to make earlier. that means, presumably, that you cannot negotiate. and what you are really saying is you have got to apply military force to guarantee that they do not have a nuclear program, and if somebody wants to make that debate, whether it is the republican leadership or prime minister netanyahu or the israeli ambassador or others, they are free to make it, but it is not persuasive. carol? you, mr. president. i want to ask you about the arms and ballistic missiles. to live to decide those? it is a sticking point on the hill, and are you concerned that arms to iran will go to there anythingis

that you or a future president can do to stop that, and if you do not mind, i wanted to see if you could step back a little bit, and when you look at this iran deal and all of the other issues and unrest that is happening in the middle east, what kind of middle east do you what to leave when you leave the white house in a year-and-a-half? obama: so the issue of the ams embargo antiballistic missile is a real concern to us, has been a real concern to us. and it is in the national security interests of the united states to prevent iran from sending weapons to hezbollah, for example, or sending weapons , thatse in yemen accelerate the civil war there. we have a number of mechanisms under international law that

gives us the authority to interdict arms shipments by iran. issue those is the related to the nuclear program. essentially, iran was sanctioned because of what had happened, the unwillingness to comply the issues with the nuclear program, and as part of the sanctions that was slapped andhem, the issues of arms .isted missiles were included now, under the terms of the original u.n. resolution, the ,act is that once an agreement once an agreement was arrived at

that gave the international community assurance that i ranted not have a nuclear weapon, you could argue just looking at the text that those arms and ballistic missiles prohibitions should immediately go away, but what i said to our negotiators was given that iran and theched trust uncertainty of our allies in the region about iran's activities, let's press for a longer gotension of the arms embar and ballistic missile prohibitions, and we got that. we got five years in which, under this new agreement, arms coming in and out of iran are prohibited, and we got eight years with respect to ballistic missiles, but part of the reason extend ite willing to only for five, let's say, as

opposed to a longer period of is because we have other resolutions that prohibit arms sales by iran to organizations like hezbollah. we have other u.n. resolutions and multilateral agreements that give us authority to interdict arms shipments from iran throughout the region, and so, we have had belts and suspenders and had a bunch of different legal authorities. these legal authorities under the nuclear program may lapse after five or eight years, but we will still be in possession of other legal authorities that allow us to interdict those arms. truthfully, these prohibitions are not self enforcing. it is not like the u.n. has the isacity to police what iran

doing. what it does is it gives us authority under international arms shipments from happening, in concert with our allies and our partners, and the real problem if you look at, for example, how hezbollah got a a graveissiles that are threat to israel and to many of our friends in the region, it is not because they were legal. not because somehow that was authorized under international law. it was because there was insufficient intelligence or capacity to stop those shipments so the bottom line is i share the concern of israel, saudis, gulf partners about iran shipping arms and causing conflict and chaos in the

region and that's why i said to them, let's double down and partner much more effectively to improve our intelligence capacity and our interdiction capacity so that fewer of those arm shipments are getting through the net. but the legal authorities we're still possess and obviously we got our own unilateral prohibitions and sanctionses in place around nonnuclear issues like support for hezbollah and those remain in place. on terms of the larger issues in the middle east, obviously, that's a longer discussion. i think my key goal when i turn over the keys to the president, the next president is that we are on track to defeat