live within its means that is why we will decrease if we cannot get things under control. >> my time is up but looked the other is year it is charles payne. >> president obama is trying to sell that we are all over a the nuclear backlash. longtime allies are blasting this deal to say we gave them a free pass to do their biggest enemy and in one hour the president will respond to the backlash there are signs this will be a tough sell to everyone especially the american people also looking at the president's reaction into this escape caught on video will the administration tried to do anything?

also turning up on stage three cities we hope the president speaks about it as his first response to that incident but israel's leaders call it one of the darkest days did history. >> benjamin said audion who has been staunchly against this deal but saudi arabia released a statement to say they support this deal but they bush like to see tough inspection to reimpose sanctions if needed. it is not coincidental to the first roll calls yesterday were to the leaders of israel and saudi arabia. there has been an outreach campaign we have already seen under way as officials told us that would be the case. about one hour from now the president will give a rare

news conference and though ready today we saw the vice president up on capitol hill pitching a deal to ruth democratic lawmakers once said the concerns for democrats was the 24 day window if iran does not when disaffections they can set forth a window to delay that. >> appears to me to be a 24 day process. and whether to accept an invitation to a rotary club. >> the lot can be done in 24 days. >> but the vice president says he feels they will be all right. the president speaks and about one hour from now. charles: and criticism comes "fast & furious" and former new york city mayor rudy guiliani echoes concerns.

>> i consider this steel to be very dangerous one of the most reckless deals made by an american president you make a deal. >> the former israeli ambassador who fears and that this is far worse to underestimate germany. >> i think this is a horrific mistake with a terrific price. three of those things that come to mind is like all over again. is a repeat to those mistakes that led us to

north korea to become a nuclear power. but the future is not what it used to be. to be less secure and more of the title after yesterday's because this is a deal with a mass murderer. with the chinese and the russians with the world's most evil an officious mishima given of free pass to become nuclear. it is the nightmare i hope the president in the american people will come to their senses realizing what a horrible mistake this is. >> they say though wheels were already in motion

toward iran getting a nuclear weapon but that this would postpone that. may be in 10 or 50 years. maybe the old library and of the shaw no longer has the blood thirst for israel? you don't buy that? >> if you believe that i have a bridge to sell you. the iranians are mastered negotiators and its receivers. and to set the of path for them what i respect greatly but she bore than anybody else realized she was taken for a ride by these master statesman. is that what people must understand because north

korea acquired weapons and iran seeks them out. turvey i do not believe the iranians. i see a will lie and cheat and it is not a matter of trust. charles: the window will close the deal is the neck the iranians will actually use a nuclear weapon? >> i am not shirt even if they are crazy enough but they have no compunction to make them available to rogue regimes and terror organizations including how moss or many others whose fingers are already bloodied this is what escapes me how the united states could be the you these people and to negotiate with them the way they did.

charles: the majority of the american public does not trust them either so the future could be what we thought but it is not over yet. thank you. hillary clinton and throwing her support behind this deal. surprise. she just parents the same policies from the white house does america really want four more years? you think the iranian moves they got us where we are are pretty good things? >> i think it is smart politics as obama has been in office we just got a deal with the country with germany and others baton the economic peace we have gone from the ditch do dig our way out.

charles: people point that wages are substantially lower in those have gotten a job for making 35 percent less. >> what i thought was interesting is it was more economic and political speech. hillary clinton is signaling we will not get a new and exciting dynamic but more of the save if you want new and exciting look to birdie sanders. charles: what about the sense of what was it the -- what would work? as "the donald" trump is resonating eight years by the time the election comes up to you one more of that? i don't know if the american public will say yes.

>> hillary clinton elbowed day obama adminstration to say we have to go after wall street banks and the individuals and that is one of the main populist tropes against the administration and she came that way at the end of the speech. >> tax the wealthy it is not fair. all of this stuff we heard over and over and hillary clinton has been a buddy for so long but it seems like it will not work as they could make their lives better. >> you are right there is frustration with the american electorate. even though we had a recovery there is hard-working americans. she cannot run from the

successes the administration has had been she should talk how that money could be used to create more jobs to let them have a narrative. that is the key to success a matter the nominee. charles: we will see more over the next few months. in less than an hour the president will be fielding reporters' questions not only 86 budget el chapo and sanctuary cities and 2016. donald trump is now on top of the republicans. look at the numbers. surging but still trailing hillary clinton. >> she is a sad candidate she is collapsing the campaign is collapsing i would not be surprised if she lost like she did to

obama. charles: charlie gasparino says republicans are worried about trump. next.

this is a great place to work. not because they have yoga meetings and a juice bar. because they're getting comcast business internet.

comcast business offers convenient installation appointments that work around your schedule. and it takes- done. - about an hour. get reliable internet that's up to five times faster than dsl from the phone company. call 800-501-6000 to switch today. perks are nice. but the best thing you can give your business is comcast business. comcast business. built for business. >> i say 21 percent is the real number and it is the shame if i was president i would get the jobs back. charles: tough talk from donald trump it may be that el chapo bob up and in front talk about a thoroughbred leading all republican candidates in the "usa today" poll and g.o.p. donors are running just as fast in the other direction.

what are they afraid of? >> break it up their g.o.p. in the northeast are big donors they appear broken down for three candidates most of them jeb bush some are for marco rubio or scott walker what "the donald" is doing is taking votes and putting himself on the stage with those three and here's our they're really worried that he will be on the same stage i guess cleveland is the first debate he will just throw bombs that jeb bush and marco rubio and walker. he will just blow it up. i had dinner with some of them last night. they are split some say we should go after him directly

others say don't others say if you lay back he will get bigger or to otherwise you get involved so it is a confusing time. charles: these are big money you need water to in your camp to win. charles: he doesn't have anyone. >> not because of his net worth or what he says today that disclosure will come out that he will not spend one dime. maybe with bodyguards taste -- but he wants you will make speeches and go on twitter and because he is who he is he will attract that media attention that they all wish they could have. here is what they're really afraid of they are not as

nasty. in a debate he will say anything it is like fighting mike tyson. charles: i have done some research to talk about the many dictating who will win you can see them coming up in the polls sometimes of hot money has to follow the hot candidate to any of them say if it is inevitable i will jump on the bandwagon? >> they've seen he will not win but just cause damage and the people are hoping he focuses more on and jeb bush they and on them. but he will not have to spend more because the top three need to have a recognition but donald trump already has that. charles: just make sure you shake everybody down before

the debate. >> i always watch the first one. another big deal going down to this moment. we are awaiting the final vote on the new bailout this is the third one as the imf is threatening to pull out to pay increase new money is like paying your kids to behave. >> i think that is what is going on with greece as well. give credit where it is due rather than a group of than people they get the point that based on these terms agreed to last sunday it will not reverse or relieve them from the debt problem because they know there is not enough growth to pay

back their debt so they needed a bigger package. charles: are day arguing for debt relief or a combination ? >> dell little both but the imf is already in the bucket with 10 percent on the hook but they see the tax increases and spending cuts will not lead to even if growth for greece to say we have the money to pay back that debt my thought is to have to go back to great -- to greece to devalue the currency to pay back the money it is just currency they cannot afford. >> but nobody wants that. the imf is one you have the troika it is all about the eurozone and keeping that together so is it likely

they would even go for that? >> either you go for that data it will work out over the next four or five years or keep telling them you owe us 20 billion euros now with his 40 billion and keeps going up. they will not get the year rose back -- the rollback is out there with their handout they're all asking for money bet that the counter just keeps going up. charles: i think they will cut a deal with though we can and and i'd maybe six years from now it will not be official but we will give you debt relief that we cannot put that into writing. >> that is fair but i do theca it is dangerous because don't think portugal and italy have noticed that

is probably going on so they are waiting to ask for the same deal. charles: i am calling my son to put the $2 back. >> he owes you money. charles: now down over 2 percent remember yesterday it was up but iran will flood the market with more oil over the next few years. and at 1:00 p.m. eastern the president will be talking. it is christmas in july for amazon prime customers. and how it hurts america's bottom line.

everywhere you look, it strategy is now business strategy.? and a partnership with hp can help you accelerate down a path created by people, technology and ideas. to move your company from what it is now... to what it needs to become.

targeting conservative groups committee partiers which is the subject of investigation in washington d.c. what we know about the pages as they are looked at by judicial watch in their attorneys expect to have details coming up later this afternoon. there were big questions about whether the irs would comply with the order. they were supposed to put out

information last monday. the judge's order came out two weeks ago. nothing last monday, nothingness wednesday we get details. we don't know what is sydney's 900 pages. still waiting to see. i'll bring this to the network as soon as they get them. >> you've been all over this. can't wait to get a new details. retail sales pretty good. this is amazon and wal-mart trying to drum up business with lack friday deals. good consumers get used and never go back to paying for it twice. dagen mcdowell, joe intent. give give us the details. >> they are slashing prices for 24 hours. in response to wal-mart and target in macy's and other retailers including best buy have also slashed prices saying

you don't have to pay the $99 every year or even to the free trial to get a discount. some of the deal will be a $200 tv. a candle for half off. there has been social stand the deals are not good enough. they are not what people want to buy. >> they are selling out because the deals expire. you need to buy now while supplies last. there are all these deals. 42 pays rubbermaid storage that. can't get your hands on it. the list is huge of this stuff so people complain about it that are still snapping it up at the higher pressure gauge. >> a kind of lure you in. you can get the regular price

xyz. >> this is a smart move because no matter what we think you're talking about them. they are driving traffic no matter what appeared you will still see other things you could buy especially if you're an amazon test murder. >> it is the television set. throw it in for free. >> by the way, and target, best buy have been doing this a number of years to make a sales day in in july. with amazon they are trying to drum up more prime subscribers. charles: it created a holiday on their own and is huge. >> $9 billion last fall. if you compare that to the net revenue of amazon, one day is $9 billion on amazon total

$89 billion. charles: that's amazing. michelle, people are pretty savvy. we see where the big shopping day has moved away closer towards christmas when retailers are really getting desperate. do something like this backfire in the same retailers? keep coming. but wait for the next holiday you want to create and sell a 42 piece tupperware set. >> it is technically rubbermaid. >> nicely done. >> 42 pieces. >> 42 pieces for $14.99. charles: are they shooting themselves in the foot? >> especially because it is july, people have them waiting for a deal. they may wait until this day comes around. at the same time, they are trying to offload merchandise as

well. they are trying to offload the amazon. that's for sure. charles: i mean, the amazon phone or the obama phone to be together. >> the amazon .co was gone, the whole management system. charles: it is a potpourri of everything nobody wanted. that's the next big style. i thought my husband's tenure anniversary gift for tomorrow online today and it cost me all of $20. so much for 11 years. charles: netflix now more affordable thanks to the seven to one stocks. it is still too late to buy in? we are going to tell you.

do you want to know how hard it can be to breathe with copd? it can feel like this. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva is a once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that helps open my airways for a full 24 hours. spiriva helps me breathe easier. spiriva respimat does not replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva respimat. discuss all medicines you take, even eye drops. if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells,

you get hives, vision changes or eye pain or problems passing urine, stop taking spiriva respimat and call your doctor right away. side effects include sore throat, cough, dry mouth and sinus infection. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. to learn about spiriva respimat slow-moving mist, ask your doctor or visit spirivarespimat.com

dagen: a business alert for you. netflix talks always fun to watch. seven to one docs but this morning. take a look at how the shares are doing today. they are down a little bit but it's still the best performing

stock down 1.5%. so far this year it has more than doubled. that the big question is will not like stock continued to go higher? if you look at the s&p 500 companies and those that are split stocks to march 2009, the average return to the upside is 25%. that is positive. also look at apple, the only other major company in the last 15 years to do that in the year after the split of 36%. however with netflix, second-quarter earnings today and after second-quarter earnings the stock does not perform that well. shares have declined four out of five times the day after second-quarter earnings with an average loss of 9%. the biggest thing to watch with

earnings of subscriber growth. here's the number to watch. 619,000 domestic subscribers. that is what you're looking for internationally. watch for 1.94 million where the growth is overseas. charles: i'm a little nervous on this one. by the way, do any of you listen to me? let's get down to business. my first stock of the day is netflix. sometime next year netflix would be a $600.. once again netflix shares were higher. even today we are making some money. >> since i originally recommended netflix, it is still worth getting into right now? christopher says that the by, but hilary kramer says don't buy it. chris, state your case. >> charles, where is the growth? we are going from 50 market to

over 200. we also see the continued shift from dvds to streaming which is far better margins and as far as the competitive landscape, we hear about hbo and some others. we know is netflix rolls out internationally, it will be like amazon expanding internationally. like the iphone going in or national. charles: i want to jump in here because you bring on these great points but you also talk about competition. competition is coming on heavy. the growth comes at a cost. this is where people are worried about netflix, myself and looted. you've got to bring money to the bottom line. >> i don't think they will show a lot. they will rent out a number of international markets and their starter costs. i'm a little worried about the

currency for tonight and the startup costs. i would be a stronger buyer after they report. we may see pullback. currency has been a big issue and i think the risk reward is probably better. long term if the international expansion will drive the growth. charles: almost everyday, someone comes out with the buy. the other day they raised it to 780. i am wrong, everyone is wrong. why? >> netflix pays so much money for content and margins continue to contract. this program orange is the new black, for example, house of cards hasn't received the reviews they should have. charles: forget about reviews. they've got following. >> that is just it. perhaps the attraction isn't as strong now. the new look at the programming like movies.

i couldn't find bad news bears, but you can even find lorax, despicable me, the movies you would want to watch aren't on netflix and address people like me all over the world to apple tv and other arenas. charles: does anyone have a larger library ban them? the same arguments as they can't have every movie ever made. >> it's more about proprietary content. i hate to break in there. every mansion house of cards. she mentioned orange is the new black. they have a fantastic deal that will show programming throughout the year. that is what makes services to key and people want those services. you don't count that as much as amazon prime. >> they do have a head start and they are getting the benefit of the doubt. to your point, wall street is so far judged them the way we judge the stops back in the day.

they counted more than bottom line. to your point that is something going on right now. they've been able to pull it off this long. charles: can netflix to internationally? 58% annual compounded growth to hit it out of the park. the topline is fair. we will see 1.65 billion sales on revenue. but the bottom line -- charles: it will be 12 cents. netflix needs by 12 cents bottom line. kristen, great seeing you guys. now drop in looking for this yesterday it is picking up big time. listen, the gas goes lawyers, high-performance cars will be paying for it. we've got someone out there testing high performance. the nissan supercar testing it. he will see if you can drop the sound barrier. my money is on jeff.

hi my name is tom. i'm raph. my name is anne. i'm one of the real live attorneys you can talk to through legalzoom. don't let unanswered legal questions hold you up, because we're here, we're here, and we've got your back. legalzoom. gal help is here.

charles: fox business alert. the new bill for them could mean a huge gas price drop for us. after the market gets flooded with iranian oil. the drop could send the gas guzzlers high-performance cars. to prove it to nashville superspeedway with the helmet on a thing. what is going on there, just? >> you would love to be here today, charles. i'm surrounded by race cars in the nissan gets back into the racing game, you know performance cars are definitely doing it. today i get in the vehicle. this is a nissan 373. they are taking gamers, people that do it online and then turn them into professional racecar drivers. they are trying to do that with me.

watch as we take off here. this has got to speed. the nissan does this, you know times have changed in terms of electric cars. you may remember that nissan made a $5 billion that i may let tricks and more fuel-efficient vehicles. now they have a new lease coming out. they are focusing on getting it up to 110. i am on the stretch right now on the national superspeedway. i'll do another lap if we are going to get to 110. these guys, the real professional drivers. charles: hit it, jeff.

>> you would have a great time in here. you may not fit in here, but you would love it if you did. charles: from now on we're playing the speed racer theme. you get the coolest assignments. that might be the top one yet. charles: dagen is deceiving you. -- this scene -- i don't know, that looks pretty fast. transport it is not that fast. you put down the track in a day and i will walk him. >> by the way, we can't see that. also waiting to see president obama, his reaction from his cell to the american public with his iranian deal backlash hot and heavy. for the deal only add to

tensions? these are going to get a whole lot worse real quick. we will be right back. can a business have a mind? a subconscious. a knack for predicting the future.

reflexes faster than the speed of thought. can a business have a spirit? can a business have a soul? can a business be...alive? who needs to keep busy. if she's not working in her garden, she's probably on one of her

long walks with bailey. she was recently diagnosed with a heart condition. i know she's okay, but it concerned me she's alone so often. so i encouraged her to get a medical alert button. philips lifeline offers the best options to keep her doing the things she loves in the home she loves. if she ever falls, or needs help, i know we can get to her quickly, and with her condition that can be critical. and even though she doesn't typically go far from home, the button always goes with her. these days, she's still as busy as ever. just the way she likes it. innovation and you. philips lifeline. lifeline is america's #1 medical alert service. visit philipslifeline.com/caregiver today or call this number for your free brochure and ask about free activation.

charles: breaking news. looking live at the east room of the white house. at the top of the next hour, president obama will hold a news comp runs. iran, the economy, el chapo in the race for the white house in 2016. i ran unchanged. that is the question for the ambassador did very bad news just around the corner. >> the world's most evil and vicious terror regime and they are given a free pass to become

nuclear. this is a nightmare and i hope the president and the american people will come to their senses and realize what a horrible mistake of days. charles: former assistant defense secretary joins me right now. a lot of people condemning this. i haven't heard too many folks say it was a great deal. even hillary clinton said it was an important step. nevertheless the one president obama has drawn up. this is the one he's threatening congress saying i'm going to push this through no matter what. what is he missing? >> is missing a lot and would hear about that in the next hour. he has been listening to the criticism the last couple days since he made the announcement and he is responding to that. he has had its troops out there talking to people on the hill that have concerns. vice president joe biden has

been unfair and he's basically going to lay out his case for why this is a good deal and not just a deal and certainly not a bad deal. >> peter, you just mentioned joe biden. so ms is certainly a problem. first and foremost the notion look at the nuclear weapon that they will cheat on this thing and construct up to 24 days. ultimately the bottom line is no one believes the iranians will live up to any portion of the bill. >> i don't see a lot of good news. i level of distress between iran and its neighbors. the neighbors are seriously concerned about this including israel. this is only a pause, charles. this does not end the iranian nuclear program. when we started down the road, the idea was we would trade the

economic sanctions for iran's nuclear program. we didn't get iran's nuclear program. i would doubt was a pause. the problem is it has a sunset provision that all of the restrictions will be lifted after 10 years. assuming iran abides by the deal at all. after 10 years they will move forward with its nuclear program if they want to. a lot of us think they will ultimately cheat along the way that we saw with north korea. i worked on the issue and as a republican staffer on the house and the house of representatives during the clinton administration. we were concerned about the north korean deal celebrated in 1994. charles: let me jump in because the presidents conference is going to start. is there any chance that congress will stand up for he may have second thoughts on this? >> when he agreed to this legislation giving them 30 to 60

days, he went around and counted noses and said he had dirty for votes in the senate he could count on so they could not override his veto. he's still feeling pretty confident. >> at the top of the hour. we'll bring it to you live when it begins. your iran, said the, we hope you're at all. we are right on top of it

when you're not confident you have complete visibility into your business, it can quickly become the only thing you think about. that's where at&t can help. at&t's innovative solutions connect machines and people... to keep your internet of things in-sync, in real-time. leaving you free to focus on what matters most. we are beginning a journey, we are bound by nothing. technology empowers us to achieve more. it pushes us to go further. to keep track of almost five million athletes, in 170 countries, you need a lot of data. up 'til now we've been tracking a lot of data manually. the microsoft cloud allows us to immediately be able to access information, wherever we are. information for an athlete's medical care, or information to track their personal best.

special olympics is really about celebrating differences, to create a world where we can accept and appreciate the gifts that we all bring to our communities. technology is the tool to make an impact. it is the tool to make a difference. with microsoft cloud, we save millions of man hours, and that's time we can invest in our athletes, our work, and changing the world.

charles: just moments away from president obama. you see the podium. he will arrive for the major press conference. he will be selling and talking iran. he probably can answer a lot of other questions. we want to know, will you help track down "el chapo"? what about sanctuary cities you don't know nothing about and donald trump coming on fast and furiously. blake burman at the white house. what can we expect, blake?

>> that will be one. interesting things what is exactly discussed on back end of all of this. keep in mind, very rare occurrence that the president gives a news conference at the white house. this undoubtedly will involve iran and the deal and the selling of this deal. senior administration officials told reporters on a conference call yesterday after this deal, a call we were listening in to, there would be outreach campaign, not only locally here in the united states but also globally. we know the president has spoken to leaders of saudi arabia and israel. several other european countries as well. here on the hill earlier today the vice president, joe biden, went to capitol hill to meet with democratic lawmakers to make the administration's pitch on all of this because lawmakers will have a say on this vote. and like we've seen recently, it will most likely need to be democrats that will have to carry this across the finish line or the president and administration.

one democrat, steve israel, after the meeting with the vice president said there are some concerns, one of them was the arms embargo. another one of them being this 24-day period iran can push these inspections back. charles? charles: blake, thank you very much. congress has 60 days to review the iranian deal but are republicans simply powerless to stop it? peters brooks is still with us, "the hill" bob cusack and bush 41 economic director todd buchholz. todd, i want to talk to you first. everyone counted numbers over and over ben. maybe republicans can shut this down but ultimately president obama will get this through. >> the president may be ideologue, may be reckless with american foreign policy and our allies but he is not dumb when it comes to counting votes. i think the president is pretty confident he has 34 votes. the fact hillary clinton is on the side of doing this deal.

elizabeth warren, to hillary's left is on the side. it is a pretty powerful flank he has. a sweep run and holding the ball and run with it probably over this treacherous goal line. charles: although, bob, i got to tell you, hillary clinton doesn't sound extraordinarily enthusiastic about the deal. i haven't heard very bait tame when elizabeth warren said but this is dangerous from other democrats want to stay in the politics game. >> i agree president obama has the votes on this unless we find out something really big about this deal. he will mostly keep his side in line. but as you mentioned, hillary clinton this is a tough spot for her and senator charles schumer. jewish donors, not real excited, a lot of them, democrats opposed to this deal. overall most democrats will support the president. republican think, we win this issue political. at least can't get the vote, put pressure on democrats,

especially democrats running for the house and senate, get them on record on this they will be playing this up over the next couple months. charles: that is a great point, peter, and i want to pose it to you. since the president has been elected we've seen a whole lot of democrats fall on their sword to vote on things they didn't want to but did it towing the party line and ultimately kicked out of washington, d.c. there has to be a few democrats thinking hey, the president will be out of here sooner than later, do i need to follow him if i don't want to? >> members will have to decide because the chances that iran will cheat on this agreement, they might have egg on their face if they support it. that is certainly a possibility. you know working on the business channel here, often the negotiations continue after the contract is signed. we're just in the early days of this new agreement and there is still a lot of things that will have to be hashed out in terms of interpretation. as people look at this, whether they support it or don't support it, they have to decide whether they think iranians will abide

by the deal, that is huge issue, issue of distrust between the two sides. >> charles? charles: go ahead. >> republicans need to point out this deal is effectively foreign aid to iran. that is, we have locked up tens of billions of dollars of iranian assets, which we will disperse to iran. does anybody think iran will do humanitarian good with this, equivalent to aid in addition to that? we'll let them pump more oil, which means they will derive 50 to $100 billion a year to that. the republicans need to point out this isn't simply a matter of sanctions lifted, it is a matter of sending money to a country we know will do dastardly harm with the funds. charles: to the list, bob, eventually sooner rather than later, getting rid of the u.n. arms embargo. essentially iran, getting everything that they want and still hard to find out what exactly everyone else is getting, what the rest of the

peaceful world will get from this other than perhaps a arms race in the middle east. >> only thing they didn't get obamacare. he should have thrown that in. charles: he promised at beginning of negotiation if you want your nukes, you keep your nukes but iranians didn't believe him. what do you think, bob? >> overall that is what the arms embargo has major concerns on both sides of the aisle, what that means. there are no conditions stopping funding terrorism. this nuclear deal. they can continue what they have been doing in other countries including syria, as well what is not in the deal any agreement to release american prisoners. charles: that would seem like lo hanging fruit. i'm glad you brought that up. four americans are being held there. why couldn't we bring them home? this is nuts! that seems like the easiest part of the deal to get done. >> i thought this would be part of this deal including a reporter from "the washington post." it is an ongoing saga. i'm surprised it has not been

part of the negotiation. we're getting media attention on this issue which i think is very good thing to apply pressure. when you had leverage, that is a valid question, why weren't those four americans part of this deal? charles: to the liz being mcdonald here and dagen mcdowell. as we await this, ladies, this deal, got to tell you, we were warned, dagen. it is here, right there, they will push it through and get it through congress. >> a arms embargo lifted in five years and ban on missiles lifted in eight. charles: iran gets $100 billion back real soon. >> you get iran very close to nuclear weapon with its covers filled with cash and an embargo on arms lifted in a mere five years. and then again the chairman of the joint chiefs said you can not put missile technology, intercontinental means, delivering nuclear weapon to the united states potentially but that is what this potentially

could do down the road. charles: emac? >> you know what? this whole talk of a snap-back on sanctions, we're on cheats and sanctions are back on, how will that work when you have companies around the world pouring into iran to do business with iran, giving it a veneer of official consent? exxonmobil, shell, boeing, ge is already in there. more companies will go in there. are they going in there to say, we'll agree with you, let's put sanctions back on after companies, france, germany started doing business with iran? charles: let's not forget europeans will pour lots of money in there. with the greece deal they don't mind pouring good money after bad. if iran make as mistake they might talk their way out of it, need all the players to come back to the table. >> not to mention russia and china could say no to reenacting -- charles: russia probably will. >> they could reject sanctions

if you try to put them back on if the president cheats. >> i hope president gets tough questions on economy. white house lowered growth forecast for 2015 and 2016. they expect the economy to grow 2% this year down from 3% forecast. you saw retail sales fell unexpectedly last month. estimates for growth in the second quarter by economists are being lowered. why aren't people spending? can ask him that. stop blaming it on the last administration. you've been there since early 2009. >> dagen, interesting, 2% because the white house over since i think 2009 has been saying 4% growth. that is half. that is line what we're seeing, 1.8 average growth since the president sat down in the white house. charles: definitely without a doubt the worst postrecession recovery in history. blake, to you. any word on some other topics, particularly the u.s. economy that the president is being billed today? >> this is being billed as a

news conference for iran. keep in mind, chars, this something they have not necessarily cleared the schedule for but the president was traveling yesterday and obviously gave that statement in the morning. he is traveling later today to oklahoma. we'll have this news conference here as well. he is slated to leave, or at least wrap this up at about 2:20, they say. we're appearing this will be in the ballpark of an hour or some they're running a little late. we anticipate majority at front will be iran, certainly with news conference from the president you anticipate other questions coming up as well. charles: i would imagine, there has to be a reporter champing at the bit to talk about the economy and "el chapo." yesterday jeh johnson didn't even know who kate steinle was. that was embarrassment. that will come up, emac. >> time and again we've seen another issue pop up, whether or not the president takes questions. retail sales.

we talked a lot about wage growth and job growth, income inequality. we have new fresh data coming out of economist ed yardeni. he is saying this speaks to the income inequality debate. when you look at bea data, household average income is 120,000. why? he factored in employee benefits. he factored in means tested government programs which census knocks out. inequality lessens when the benefits households getting from the government and their companies. charles: todd, i want to go back to you, you talked about this being how the republicans should pitch it but is there any sort of chance, and i know we all said the president is pretty good counting his votes and he feels pretty confident about this, as this pours out into the public domain and more people read about it and learn bit, i got a feeling, particularly jewish members of congress will feel particular kind of pressure they may have never felt before to go against the president.

>> well, they may feel that pressure, but, charles, i think hillary clinton has support and credibility in that community. so from hillary clinton they will hear that she will be a tough president monitoring this agreement. and i think the trust that she has built up over the years with the jewish community will help her and help president obama in this situation. charles: how can we distinguish herself? she already come out, said she would be a greater friend to the israeli people than president obama. how could she distinguish herself if she rubberstamp this is deal that israel, benjamin netanyahu hates the deal, he thinks it is one of the worst deals in history? >> yeah. you know what all americans should do and what republicans should distribute against fact sheets of the white house, if you go to the website of the iranian government news agency, and hear how they describe the agreement, it is abhorrent and

it is frightening because it describes it as kind of a liberation of iran's nuclear ambitions. you know you mentioned earlier about iran getting everything that they want. it really is an extraordinary situation. then you think about poor greece. greece has to negotiate with angela merkel in germany. if only greece had the ability to negotiate with john kerry i think they would have gotten a better deal on money and aid because iran is getting a lot of aid from us. charles: you know, peter, the idea of a lot of people saying forget about the north korean deal, this goes back to neville chamberlain. is that being hyperbolic or honest and sober ultimately what this leads to the world? >> i think people have the right to be concerned about that. back in 1938 people didn't look soberly at the threat that was there in nazi germany. i also think about what are the north koreans thinking about this? will they come and look for a

similar sort of deal and also do provocative things to get us to the come to the table because of what iran has got and number of concessions they have gotten. we don't know what the future holds. based on past behavior, based on past behavior there is good reason to be concerned. charles: bob? >> this will spark a nuclear arms race because saudi arabia, bahrain, qatar and israel need to amp up their programs in order to counter this sure path that we have put in front of iran. i think president obama may well go down as the anti-nuclear proliferation president. >> let me ask you guys this. let me ask charles this. if we think iran gets everything it wants will it become even more active in yemen, syria and other countries where it has been really being raising a ruckus. charles: absolutely no doubt. iran, this is a secular battle we entered into. now we've got, i think this

pushes closer to saudi arabia having to help them. they're flying sorties over yemen. they're not helping much. >> arms will flow into the country in five years from china and russia so where dot arms go? supplier of arms to hezbollah, hamas, houthi rebels in yemen. backers of the syrian government. backers of shia militias in iraq. >> tough because iran helps with fight in isis. i'm only business journalist. that is what i read. charles: here is the first day that saud saw buys the first nuke from pakistan. they will not a nuclear program from scratch. the nuclear clock hits midnight. bob cusack, i go to you, feels like ininevitable that the clock is ticking right now. maybe something will happen in washington, d.c. that diverts this but seems like a done deal. >> you have a lot of dangerous players acquiring nuclear weapons. obviously north korea is one of

them. you guys mentioned them. i think, listen, these are difficult solutions, that is what president obama made the case -- charles: can we use the word solution in this case though? seems like it might have been a difficult compromise but it is not the solution. it doesn't do anything to emac's point that deters belligerent iran with fingers all over the world, murder, blood on his hands, to destroy israel. does not recognize israel. made disdain for israel plain for everyone to see and yet this, i don't know that we can call this a solution as much as a surrender. >> well it could be a solution. it could be a disasterous. this is a huge risk from the president. you think about obamacare and dod dodd-frank. this is biggest thing he has done. his legacy will be tied to the success or failure to this i will deal. whether hillary clinton is next president or not, the next

president will be able to even though the deal in place, change the deal. also call out iran certainly. i think better chance this deal obviously stops if there is republican president in office in 2017. a huge risk from the president. you guys were talking about trust before. we have not been able to trust iran for decades. and now we're trusting them. that is why it is such a huge risk. charles: i think, todd, also another interesting point on this, when the president was initially selling it to the american people he said if iran cheats the world will know it. okay. they're not exactly the kind that will sneak a cookie in the middle of the night. they kick the door down and take the cookies. they don't care if the world knows. i think that hasn't deterred, the world will know and shame them? that is scary stuff. >> you kind of wonder whether the signature page on this document is signed, iran, death to america and death to israel. you know typically these sorts

of deals start with a preamble, a preamble saying, in recognition of iran's forbearance and willingness to not bomb israel or not provide funds to al qaeda we engage in this following agreement, there is no preamble like that, there is no tying of this. charles: no. >> when you look back at history, look back at agreements signed by whether president kennedy, president nixon, president ford, president carter at camp david, there was always at least some statement of the intentions to promote peace in the world and human rights. there is nothing in this document. it is -- >> right. to your point, watch president obama in this press conference make statements of fact that are incorrect. you know "the wall street journal" had a great piece today to do their inspections. to inspect the sites. the inspectors have to request permission or ask for permission.

if iran rejects it, goes through all the review boards and u.n. security council. charles: four-day review, seven-day review, adds up to 24 days. >> iraq makes our government look streamlined. charles: you can do a lot in 24 hours, 24 days. we have on the phone former undersecretary of defense jed babin. we heard all the different worries about this. what should be our main worry as americans, not necessarily as global citizens but as americans with this deal? >> well our basic worries are twofold, charles. number one, we have to face the fact that the congress is made irrelevant. the arms embaggoer will be relieved by the united nations regardless what the congress does. all the things the president granting to iran will really happen regardless of what our congress will do to approve or disapprove. let's not pretend we have any voice in this. the second point this insures

that iran has nuclear weapons, five, 10 years, probably sooner. and they will be able to do what they will, at the same time, accompanying that they are going to receive in relief of this arms embargo the russian missiles, the s-300 anti-aircraft, anti-missile systems that will make sure that -- charles: jed, need to hold right there. hold that thought. there are great points you're making. we have to go back to washington. blake burman has a news report. new news. blake. >> charles, we're hearing this from one of our producers on capitol hill hearings about this deal might start as soon as next week, wednesday. so that would be one week from now. part of those hearings would be the secretary of state john kerry, the head of the energy department, ernie moniz, and treasury secretary jack lew. obviously trying to work with scheduling and the like to get all three. we're hearing that could happen as soon as next wednesday. the reason for those three seems

fairly clear. kerry, is of course the one who was the one who brokered this deal. moniz, according to who they really want to hear from he is the scientist here. he would give them all the technicalities behind this. jack lew presumably would like to hear from him about the financing and sanctions and all that. so we're hearing that might take place, these hearings, as soon as wednesday. charles? charles: blake, really rushing to get this through. jed, want to go back to you, you were talking about congress being irrelevant with respect to the deal. a lot of people would say that is the case for a long time. in fact congress ceding their authority for whatever reason. you were making point, the other main point americans should be concerned about. >> well, yeah, i was just making the point about the s-3 missiles supplied by russia, anti-defense aircraft and missiles. basically it's a binary system. okay? if you have the s-300s, you

can't bomb any iran targets without stealth aircraft. the israelis don't have it. if you don't have the s-300s, maybe you fly there and do a lot of things. only solution for israel, and worst possible solution, well, they have nuclear capable, tacit, missiles, that they might be a i believe to fire from their submarines and that is the last resort for anybody. this is a big, big deal. this takes away israel's power to defend sit elf. and it provides iran with nuclear weapons. it can't get any worse than that charles. charles: why did russia -- it was provocative move and deal was cut a while ago to sell iran the s-300s. they put it on hold, trying to quote, unquote be a good global citizen. why did they go ahead with the deal to say we'll ship them out to you? what was their motivation because it's a pretty provocative move? >> their motivation is, the

russians do what they always do, provoke and involve themselves wherever they can so sending iran those missile systems would be enormous provocation, they backed down that iran didn't have hard currency to pay at that time. that will change as soon as they get their signing bonus from obama. charles: speaking of signing bonuses, peter, i want to go from throughout this. up to $100 billion. put that into the global economy. do a lot of trade particularly with europe. that is a good thing. we have to be concerned how much will be spent on trouble making in the region. >> first the $100 billion is frozen oil and gas assets. that's one thing. putting them back into the international economy, allowing their oil to flow into international markets will put a lot more money into their pockets. obviously they're up to their necks what is happening in

syria. they're supporters of regime in damascus of bashar al-assad. they're fighting a war in yemen. they're trying to get increased influence in iraq. they're involved with the taliban in afghanistan. i would expect iran having money in their pockets, of course they use some for infrastructure, trying to upgrade their energy capabilities, once again, iran, even state department said this spring, said they're most active sponsor of terrorism in the world and they will continue to do that. they have the desires to be most powerful country in the middle east. certainly in the muslim world, to create what they're calling a shiite crescent. this is persian power stretches from the persian gulf through the mediterranean, from iraq, syria and lebanon. i think they will use it for a lot of nefarious purposes. it could go beyond the region. many people are concerned about cooperation and collaboration with north korea on nuclear and ballistic missile programs. some of that money would

certainly move that along. charles: guys, who would think, 2500 years after xerexs humiliated by 300 spartans, greekss would getting crumbs and iranians, persians would get nuclear missiles. jeb, this is important point, if israel can not defend themselves would a president clinton or president trump or president anyone willing to step up to the plate, rather than to try to shame iran but put in place or eliminate any nuclear threat that starts to evolve. >> clinton certainly wouldn't. we know that. she he would be the third term of obama. god only knows donald trump doesn't know what he would do. i doesn't. i would love to prediction -- charles: is there any candidate running now would take action. >> i don't think so. i think there could be some at some point. you need to look for somebody who really has the whole picture together, the whole gilo

political picture -- geopolitical picture changes when iran has nuclear weapons. nobody is prepared for that as far as i can tell among these 15, 16, 2016 candidates. we have one minute warning. emac? >> how saudi arabia is going to react. interesting how israel is moving closer to saudi arabia. charles: this made interesting bedfellows. even america and iran occasionally against isis. we're talking a big boys thing. this is powerhouse in the region. they have ambitions that go far beyond where they are right now. dagen, this is a great deal. ultimately gives them money, gives them weaponry, gives them power and influence. what can stop them? >> nothing. only if saudi arabia speaks up loudly next few weeks about opposition to the deal, not

likely. if you start to hear a lot more out of the middle east, not just israel why this is bad deal maybe turns some people on capitol hill. charles: make a -- >> waiting for jimmy carter to bless this deal because he has been such a friend of the state of israel. charles: i'm pretty sure he will. peter brookes, final thoughts from you on all of this? >> i think there are stormy days ahead. you know i'm very concerned obviously about iran. people need to understand we have not captured iran's program. we have not ended iran's nuclear ambitions or capabilities. we have only frozen it. they can break out anytime they want. see what we saw with north cry a number of years ago. i think we've seen this movie before. >> the great satan. we are the great satan. that is how they see us. charles: that is the key word, the breakout. everyone is talking about when they break out and go to you on this, bob, jed sort of allude to the fact there will be parallel

effort to develop a nuke while they're waiting and when the breakout comes they will have the nuke pretty quick. >> watch that rhetoric, death to america. that is why the president and administration are having press conference and doing pr offensive because iran is so unpredictable and that could sway public opinion. this vote may not happen for a while but the president will veto anything that comes to his desk. we'll see what happens over the next couple weeks. >> charles, here's the basic question. are the american people safer when there are sanctions on iran than when iran is free from sanctions? charles: hopefully, todd, we'll hear that answer, because breaking news. you're watching president obama approach the podium. he will begin telling iran's nuclear deal. >> good afternoon, everybody. yesterday was an historic day. the comprehensive long-term deal we 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 and a position of principle. when we unite the international community around a shared vision and we resolve to solve problems peacefully. as i said 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've 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. this is an important issue. our national security policies are stronger and more effective when they are subject to the scrutiny and transparency that democracy demands. and as i said yesterday the details of this deal matter very much. that's why our team worked so hard for so long to get the

details right. at the same time as this debate unfolds i hope we don't 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 and the fundamental choice that this moment represents. with this deal, we cut off every 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. with this deal we gain unprecedented, around the clock monitoring of iran's key nuclear

facilities and most comprehensive and intrusive inspection 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 violateses its commitments there will be real consequences. nuclear related sanctions that helped cripple iran's economy will snap into place. without a deal, international sanctions regime will unravel with little ability to reimpose them. with this deal we have the possibility of resolving regional threat to ininternational security. without a deal we risk even more war in the middle east and other countries in the region would feel compelled to pursue their own nuclear programs and

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

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

but this deal is our best means of assuring iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon. from the start that has been my number one priority, our number one priority. we've got an historic chance to pursue a more safer and more secure world, an opportunity that may not come again in our lifetimes. as president and as commander-in-chief i am determined to seize that opportunity. so with that i'm going to take some questions. and, let me see who i am starting off with. hmmm. here you go. i got it. andrew beatty. ap. >> thank you, mr. president. yesterday you said that the deal offered a chance at 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 destablizing actions in the region quite aside from the nuclear question? thank you. >> andrew, if you don't 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 statement. i want to reiterate it because i heard already some of the objections to the deal. the starting premise of our strategy with respect to iran has been, that it would be a grave threat to the united states, and to our allies if they obtained a nuclear weapon. and, so everything that we've done over the last six 1/2 years

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

simply my priority. if you look back at all of the debates that have taken place over the last five, six years, this has been a democratic priority, this has been a republican priority. this has been prime minister netanyahu's priority. it has been our gulf allies priority, is making sure iran does not get a nuclear weapon. the deal negotiated by john kerry, wendy sherman, ernie moniz, our allies, our partners, the p5 plus one, achieves that goal. it achieves our top priority, making sure iran does not get a nuclear weapon. but we have always recognized that even if iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon iran still poses

challenges to our interests and our values both in the region and around the world. so, when this deal gets implemented, we know that we will have dismantled the immediate concerns around iran's nuclear program. we will have brought their stockpiles down to 98%. we will have significantly reduced the number of centrifuges they operate. we will have installed an unprecedented inspection regime and that will remain in place not just for 10 years but for, example on the stockpiles, will continue to 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

more vigorous inspection and monitoring regime, that lasts in perpetuity. we will have 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 enriched, and we will have put in place inspections along the entire supply chain so that if uranium was diverted into a covert program we would catch it. so, i can say with confidence but more importantly nuclear experts can say with confidence that iran will be not in a position to develop a nuclear bomb. we will have met our number one

priority. now, we'll still have problems with iran's sponsorship of terrorism. its funding of proxies like hezbollah and that threaten israel and destablize the region. destablizeing actions they're included in places like yemen and my hope is that building on this deal we can continue to have conversations with iran that incentivize them to behave differently in the region, to be less as aggressive, less hostile, more cooperative. to operate the way we expect nations in the international community to behave but we're 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 service one particular problem, making sure they don't have a bomb. the point i repeatedly made and i believe 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 our allies interests, if they doesn't have a bomb. and so, will they change their behavior? will we seek to gain more cooperation from them in resolving issues like syria or what's happening in iraq, to stop encouraging houthis in yemen? we'll continue to engage with them although keep in mind that unlike the cuba situation we're

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

our original number unpriority, which is making sure that they don't have a bomb. john karl? >> mr. president, does it give you any pause this deal praised by syrian dictator assad as a great victory for iran and by those in tehran that still shout death to america yet our closest ally in the middle east call it big mistake of large proportions. a large portion of the congress will reject the deal and i know you can veto the rejection but do you have concern that people's representatives in congress saying this is bad deal? and if i can just ask you a quick political question. very quick one. >> john, i think -- let me answer the question that you have. it does not give me pause that

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

the facility that is underground is converted. that we have unprecedented inspections regime. we have snapback provisions if they cheat. the facts are the facts. and i'm not concerned about what others say about it. now with respect to congress, my hope, i won't 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 i bring to congress as opposed to a republican president. not based on lobbying, but based on what is in the national interests of the united states of america. and i think that 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 intrude. and, as i said, in an interview yesterday, i am not betting on the republican party rallying behind this agreement. i do expect expect the debate be based on facts, not speculation. and that i welcome. in part because, look, there are, there are legitimate, real concerns here. we've already talked about it. we have huge differences with

iran. israel has legitimate concerns about its security relative to iran. i mean you have a large country with a significant military that has proclaimed that israel shouldn't exist. that has denied the holocaust. that has financed hezbollah and as a consequence there are missiles that are pointed towards tel aviv. and so i think there are very good reasons why israelis are nervous about iran's in the world generally. i said this to prime minister netanyahu. i said this directly to the israeli people. but what lives said is, that all those threats are compounded if iran get as nuclear weapon. and for all of the objections of

prime minister netanyahu or for that matter some of the republican leadership that is already spoken, none of them have presented to me or the american people a better alternative. i'm hearing a lot of talking points being repeated about this is a bad deal. this is a historically bad deal. this will threaten israel and threaten the world, threaten the united states. i mean there has been a lot of that. what i haven't heard is what is your preferred alternative? if 99% of world community and the majority of the 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 because they will get a windfall of their accounts being unfrozen that they will cause more problems, then you should have some alternative to present. and i haven't heard that and the reason is because there really are only two alternatives hire. either the issue of iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through negotiation, or it is resolved through force, through war. those are the options. now, you will hear some critics say, well we could have negotiate ad better deal. okay. what does that mean? i think the suggestion among a

lot of the critic 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 can't have a peaceful nuclear program. they agree with us that iran can not have a nuclear weapon. and so we don't have diplomatic leverage to eliminate every vestige of a peaceful nuclear program in iran. what we do have the leverage to do is make sure they don't have a weapon. that is exactly what we've done.

so, to go back to congress, i challenged 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're right and people like ernie moniz who is mit nuclear physicist and expert on these issues is wrong. why the rest of the world is wrong. and then present an alternative. and if the alternative is that we should bring iran to heel through military force then those critics should say so. and that will be an honest debate. all right. >> mr. president, if i can prime minister netanyahu said that you have a situation where iran can delay 24 days before giving

access -- >> i'm happy to, that is a good example. so, 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'll have 24/7 inspections of declared nuclear facilities. ford. natanz, uranium facilities known to produce centrifuge, parts. that entire infrastructure we know about we will have sophisticated 24/seven monitoring of those facilities. so, then the issue is, what if they try to develop a covert program? one of the advantages of having inspections across the entire

production chain is that it makes it very difficult to set up a covert program. you know, there are only so many uranium mines in iran. if in fact we're counting the amount of uranium being mined and suddenly some's missing on the back end, they got some explaining to do. we're able to track what is happening along the existing facilities to make sure there is not diversion into a covert program. let's say iran is so determined that it now wants to operate covertly, the iaea, the international organization charged with implementing the non-proliferation treaty and monitoring nuclear activities in countries around the world. the iaea will have the ability

to that undeclared site, we're concerned about. we see something suspicious. and they will have be able to say to iran that we want to go inspect that. if iran objections we can override it. in the agreement we have set it up we can override iran's objection. and we don't need russia or china order for us to get that override. and if they continue to object, we're in a position to snap back sanctions and declare that iran is in violation and it is cheating. 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. this is not something you put on a dolly and kind of wheel off

somewhere. and by the way, if we identify an undeclared site we're suspicious about, we're going to be keeping eyes on it. so we're going to be monitoring what the activity is. and that is going to be something that will be evidence that if we think some funny business was going on there. that we can then present to the international community. so we'll be monitoring that entire time. and, by the way, if there is nuclear materiel on that site, you know, your high school physics will remind us that leave as trace. and so we'll 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? it's possible. but if it does, we built in a one-year breakout time, a year or two to respond forcefully. and, we have built in a snap-back provision so we don't have to do through lengthy negotiations through the u.n. to put the sanctions right back in place. and, so really the only argument you can make against the verification and inspection mechanism that we've put forward is that iran is so intent on obtaining a nuclear weapon, that no inspection regime and no verification mechanism would be sufficient because they find some way to get around it

because they're untrustworthy. and if that is your view, then we go back to the choice that you have to make earlier. that means presumably that you can't negotiate. and what you're really saying is, that you've got to apply military force to guarranty that they don't 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're free to make it. but is not persuasive. carol lee. >> mr. president, i want to ask you about the arms and ballistic missile embargo. why did you decide, agree to lift those even with the five eight-year duration? that is emerging as sticking point on the hill. are you concerned that arms to iran will go to hezbollah or hamas? is there anything that you or future president can do to stop

that? and if you don't mind, i wanted to see if you could step back a little bit, and when you look at this iran deal and all the other issues and unrest that is happening in the middle east, what kind of middle east do you want to leave when you leave the white house in year-and-a-half? so the issue of the -- >> so the issue of the arms embargo and ballistic missiles is of concern to us, has been of 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 to the houthis in yemen, that accelerate a civil war there. we have a number of mechanisms uninternational law that gives

us authority to interdict arms shipments by iran. one of those mechanisms is the u.n. security resolution related to iran's nuclear program. essentially, iran was sanctioned because of what had happened at fordau. its unwillingness to comply with previous u.n. security resolutions about their nuclear program. as part of the package ever sanctions slapped on them, the issue of arms and ballistic missiles was included. once an agreement, once an agreement was arrived at, that gave the international community

assurance that iran didn't have a nuclear weapon, you could argue looking at text that those arms and ballistic missiles prohibitions should immediately go away but what i said to our negotiators was, given that iran has breached trust and the uncertainty of our allies in the region about iran's activities let's press for a longer extension of the arms i am bargo and -- embargo and ballistic missile prohibitions. 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 for the respective ballistic missiles. part of the reason why we were pilling to extend it only for five let's say as opposed to a

longer period of time is because we have other u.n. 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 buttons, a whole bunch of different legal authorities. these legal authorities under the nuclear program may lapse after five or eight years but we'll still be in possession of other illegal authorities that allow us to interdict those arms. truthfully these prohibitions are not self-enforcing. it is not like the u.n. has the

capacity to police what iran is doing. what it does is, it gives us authority under international law to prevent arms shipments from happening in concert with our allies and our partners. and the real problem if you look, for example, how hezbollah got a lot of missiles that are a grave threat to israel and many of our friends in the region, it is not because they were legal, it is 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, carol, i share the concerns of israel, saudis, gulf partners, about iran shipping arms and causing conflict and chaos in the region

and that's why i have 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 arms shipments are getting through the net. but the legal authorities we'll still possess and obviously we have got our own unilateral he prohibitions and sanctions in place around non-nuclear issues like support for hezbollah and those remain in place. in terms of the larger issues of the middle east, obviously that is a longer discussion. i think my key goal when i turn over the case to the president, the next president, is, is that we are on track to