t price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value. . mark: hello, america. i'm mark levin, this is "life, liberty & levin." we have two great guests. we have congressman ron desantis, how are you, sir? >> how are you? >> congressman lee zeldin, how are you? >> great. mark: you served on the house committee on foreign affairs and i wanted you here to discuss north korea and some of the other major events that are taking place in the world today but i want america to know about you. ron desantis running for governor in florida in the republican primary.

you have been serving wonderfully in the u.s. house of representatives for some period of time. you went to yale university where you graduated with honors. then you went to harvard law school, covered both your bases there, graduated with honors from yale. also you served in the navy and you have active duty service. you supported operations, terroristetention center at guantanamo bay in cuba. deployed to iraq as adviser to u.s. navy s.e.a.l. commander and support of the s.e.a.l. commission in saudi arabia in riyadh. lee zeldin represented first congressional district, you were member of the state senate in new york before you became a congressman, you graduated from state university of new york albany, suny. >> or harvard on the hudson.

>> you were the youngest attorney, 23 years old. served active duty, military officer, military magistrate while assigned to the elite 82nd airborne division in 2006. you were also deployed to iraq with infantry battalion in support of operation iraqi freedom. you are exactly the two men i want to talk to tonight. and let's start with you, congressman desantis. north korea. the president is about to have a summit in north korea, he moved considerable military assets off the peninsula of korea. several ships, submarines, and has put enormous pressure on korea as well as economic pressure. how do you think he's doing so far with respect to north korea? >> i think it's been great. kind of reminds me when reagan came in. we had the cold war, but throughout the 70s it was detente, all the smart people in washington, communism is

here to stay and reagan is like no, we win, they lose, that's my policy. he upped the rhetoric. he was deploying missiles into europe with allies. all the people in washington thought the guy was nuts, this is crazy and look what ended up happening. eventually gorbachev realized he wasn't going to be able to beat the united states and that led to the fall of the berlin wall and the expiration of the soviet union. now north korea isn't as big a problem as the soviet union was in the cold war, but i think it's similar in the sense the last 25 years everyone in washington has basically had the same basic posture, let's hope it gets better, don't really do anything, leave it be. obama for eight years did absolutely nothing but let it fester and had the gall to tell president-elect trump north korea is going to be a big one, take care of it. trump comes in with a record of fail, and you are he bucks a lot of the conventional wisdom in washington. he's not captive to what people here think about him, and he's

willing to chart new territory. and i think that's what he's done. it's really been a full spectrum pressure campaign. yes, you mentioned the military. treasury department what they're doing, the state department, and his rhetoric upping the rhetoric and rattled north korea, rattled kim jong-un, it's still a very tough problem. we've got a long way to go. we have a much better chance of getting an acceptable outcome because the president decided to take the bull by the horns and exercise leadership. mark: and yet, congressman zeldin, leading up to this point, he's come under enormous criticism from the democrats, from the left, from some in the media the way he's handle north korea. why is that? >> his hand was on the bible, the streets of washington, d.c. were lined up with people holding up signs that said impeach him now. we have colleagues in congress, people across america who pledge to oppose this president on anything and everything. they say you cannot work with the president, if you work with him you are legitimizing his presidency.

they are delegitimizing themselves and disrespecting the oath they took to represent their constituents and their country. in reflect of what they said, people who -- nancy pelosi when she was making remarks aft president trump said that th summit w off, and he was lebrating it and mocking it as if this was a good thing for kim jong-un. so the president has opposition where he can do no right by, but fortunately the american people are standing with him, that includes by the way, there are people who didn't vote for donald trump who want him to be successful in north korea and are rooting for him and want to support him, and i really do hope we are able to see peace on the korean peninsula, we are able to see a denuclearized north korea. kim jong-un who is known to be homicidal not suicidal realized that donald trump is donald trump tweeted out and said fire and fury. the fact is if north korea attacked the united states, they would be met with fire and fury and the military option

became real and other things became real as well. mark: now as for kim jong-un, do we know much about him? you fellas sit on this very, very important committee. do members of congress know much about him? >> north korea is the toughest country on the globe to collect intel on. kim jong-un is one that, as i mentioned, he has proven to be homicidal but he wants to stay in power, wants to stay alive, that certainly is something that i think is important to leverage in understanding that we can achieve our results by utilizing that and letting him know that maybe taking on his regime is a possibility if he doesn't, not only stop the bad behavior, but also engage in the denuclearization to the next level. i think as far as the country goes, what's very different than iran, iran you have millions of iranians that will overtake the streets and overthrow the ve.rnment north korea, they don't believe their problems are because of

kim jong-un, but it's in spite of his best efforts in pursuing a better path for the north koreans, i think he has more support from his people. and i also believe that economically that the sanctions that were ramped up in 2017, we had unanimous vote, thankfully able to get china, even russia voted for effectively coming off over one-third of north korean exports in august of 2017. i think economically, they need this. they need the summit, they need this agreement more than a lot of americans and people around the world realize, and that's a good thing for getting the results we're looking for. mark: congressman desantis, do you really think that kim jong-un, the third generation of the stalinist regime is prepared to completely denuclearize north korea? do you think there's a way, if he says he will, to really ensure that he does? i mean we've had the agreements

with north korea over the last, well, since his grandfather, but really in the last 30 years or so, going back to reagan and every other president, i remember the days when south korea had 100 nuclear warheads, ours, we removed them because under george bush 41, north korea said okay, you denuclearize ande will not build nukes. now we have and they have nukes and south korea doesn't. so i know they can't be trusted, but is there really any way to make sure they follow through? >> i know that from the president, secretary of state, the national security adviser, they all are very mindful of the history that you sketched out. they are not interested in repeating some of the dog and pony shows we've seen in the past and it will need to be up-front verification of denuclearization, if they want any type of economic. we want the inverse of the iran deal, the iran deal was give

them 150 billion up-front, airlift them up 1.7 billion in cash and hope they follow through with their promises about their nuclear program. of course, we don't have the ability to check their military site, so that is not what you want to do, and if they what's they end up going down the road, that will be a mistake. kim does want to stay in power, but how does he perceive to do to stay in power? i'm not sure he's that rational in frame of the analysis. in terms of ideology, it's remain in power. one of the problems we face is qaddafi was worried that having a nuclear program made his regime less stable because they saw the united states was serious about weapons of mass destruction, so he gave up his program. obama comes in, six, seven years later and helps take the guy out. that sends a signal to people like kim jong-un, gee, why would i want to do a deal with the united states, if they're going to end up pulling the rug out from under me later?

and that's why trump has said, look, we will do protection because i think obama's policy there really did damage to our denuclearization efforts not just with north korea but other countries. mark: congressman zeldin, it's still a genocidal police state, they have the gulags with tens of thousands of people in them. they execute people willy-nilly, people are starving to death there. is that a country we want to protect? in other words, if the deal is, look, we'll take out our nukes, help feed usupport us and make sure you don't think about removing this regime. is that a deal we want to make? >> i think everything needs to be on the table, learning lessons from negotiation with iran and as ron was pointing out with regards to the verification regime with, regards to the iran deal being failing flood for what's in it. we didn't deal with all of

iran's other nefarious terrorist activities. north korea, learning the lessons on the verification front, barack obama said it's not built on trust, it's built on verification, referring to iran. the iaea and iran that when secretary kerry testified before us, admitted he hasn't read then. we did learn they collect soil samples and inspect nuclear sites. the leverage that brought the iranians tthe table a the north koreans to the table is that they want money, they want to be able to do business with neighbors and others around the world. we need to not only be talking to the north koreans about that pursuit of a denuclearized, peaceful korea. we have to be talking about all the other bad activities north korea engages in. we should be talking about cyber warfare that the koreans are engaged in. the list goes on. i think it would be a mistake not have the dialogue now when

it's possible a year or two, when we want to deal with the other issues, maybe the leverage isn't there and the north koreans around at the table. mark: china, china is not going to sit and watch all this. china is invested in north korea. china is invested in the nuclear program. they wouldn't even have a nuclear program but for china and despite the sanctions, china still cheats. we've seen the satellite pictures with the oil freighters on the high seas and so forth. what's china's deal here? what do they want to get out of this? >> our interests and china's interests are not aligned in this respect. china's making a play for dominance in the pacific. we see what they're doing in the south china sea. obviously we've seen what they're doing with intellectual property theft, cyberattacks. it's interesting, the media here is so concerned about the russia hacking of democrat party e-mail. china hacked millions of our personnel files for federal emplees iluding people involved with national security. that a massive cyberattack

and yet it was a one-day story because it didn't fit the media's narrative. china is not somebody. they're a competitor at best and it's somebody that we're going to continue to deal with. trump instinctively is tough on china. he's been tough on china rhetorically for decades now, so what i want to see is we have this issue with the zte phone company. there's kind of some of the side negotiations going on. how does that play into the overall north korea situation, and very well may be that some of the negotiations are kind of a prelude to getting china to be a little more productive than how they've been with north korea. mark: does north korea answer to china? >> i think so. i can't think of any option that deals with the north korean issue that doesn't involve china. if we came up with top 14 different ways, plans to tackle a situation with north korea involves china, and i believe that china's influence is helpful in getting the north koreans to the table to engage

in better behavior, to possibly enter into a deal where they're denuclearizing themselves. i think for the north koreans, that is one that can potentially be a good thing in reverse while china might be, they have their own selfish goals. we have ours, south korea has theirs, japan has theirs, for korea to know they have a neighbor that wants to do busissith them and smell, see the prosperity that is elusive for th. that relationship is a good thing, and if it's ignored, actually i don't think there's any way we're going to achieve the results we're looking for. one other thing i would point out is the president, and he has good people around him. mike pompeo is the secretary of state, and john bolton now the national security adviser, president trump is not going to get played, and i think that it's important up-front to make sure that the north koreans are willing to get the results we're looking for. mark: we're going to expand on this in a second. go to levin tv, crtv.com, where

i do levin tv or give us a call at 844-levin tv. we'll be right back. it's just a burst pipe, i could fix it. (laugh) no. with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just beacuase of a claim. i totally could've... (wife) nope! switching to allstate is worth it.

the first survivor of ais out there.sease and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. visit alz.org to join the fight. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.

southern coast of ireland. i think it's why we've been doing this...forever. my dad has roots in the mountains of northern mexico. home to the strongest runners in the universe. my dad's ancestors were african bantu. i bet th tolthe most amazing stories. withwice the dail of other tests... ...ancestrydna can show dad where he's from- and strengthen the bonds you share. it's only $69. give it to dad for father's day.

. mark: welcome back. congressman desantis, what's china want to get out of this? i go back and forth. do they want the peninsula denuclearized? maybe, because maybe they think the young fella is out of control and can't control him completely, and maybe it creates problems for their geopolitical agenda. on the other hand, i look at china, they're enormously aggressive. they're aggressive geopolitically, economically, militarily with the phony islands they built. they now militarized. they threaten the philippines, threaten japan, threatened vietnam, vietnam is looking to us for help. you look at cyber warfare. they're stealing us blind on our technology through a multiple of methodologies that they're using and so forth and making alliances with enemies like iran. they have ties with russia. what does china want to get out of our discussions with north korea, do you think? >> well, look, north korea in

many ways provides a buffer for them against u.s. influence, against japanese influence. i mean, north korea and that regime particularly a nuclearized north korea is not as good for the good guys in the region. not as good for the united states, south korea, not as good for japan. all of our allies in the pacific do not want to see a nuclearized north korea. so in that china understands t nature of the regime, but at the same time, it's not clear to me that a denuclearized korean peninsula is necessarily something that china views that's in its best interest if it is hell-bent, which i think it is, expanding power throughout the region. mark: congressman zeldin, what do you say to people who say, yeah, they can give up nukes in north korea because they have the relationship with china. and china will expand its umbrella to cover north korea? >> the north koreans have a path here that not only will

they be a safer economically, but also safer with their national security and what they view as existential threats to their nation. i think that that could be part of north korea's calculation in deciding to denuclearize is understanding that there are people around them in this new path forward for their nation that they will be safer, they'll be more secure. i think that they've also -- here in our country and we heard secretary mattis say national debt is a national security concern. i think in north korea, their economic oblems,t this point, they're viewing that too as a national security concern. yes, you have developed more nuclear capability than you used to have, but what do you have to show for it? what are you going to do with it that is non-nuclear, that's peaceful, that's going to lead to prosperity. so i think that there is not just -- and it goes hand in hand, i think there's a path forward for north korea where they're safer economically,

they're safer with regards to what they might view as existential threats, the physical security of their country too. mark: in a way, i can't imagine china wants us to have a relatively, i won't say close relationship, quasi working relationship with north korea because it doesn't serve china's purpose. there on china's border, china is expanding. china is trying to influence our alliances, and so that's why i don't trust china. am i wrong about that? >> i think that china has an important role to play in helping rebuild north korea because very consistent with president trump's approach to foreign policy is that we have a goal of negotiating concessions as it relates to a nuclear program and bringing the korean peninsula together, but president trump isn't looking to sit down at that table and all of a sudden assume all of the huge infrastructure costs and what it is going to take to rebuild

their nation that's been devastated. mark: talking about south korea and japan kicking in money to help? >> i think it's certainly important for more nations in that region to be taking a leadership role. we see it in other challenges that we face. middle east and elsewhere, where nations in that region of the country taking on a leadership role in rebuilding their region and working with their neighbors and not making it the united states responsibility to fix it for them. mark: congressman desantis, this isn't a piece in our time moment, is it? where they say we'll denuclearize, we want tens of billions of dollars, we don't care where it comes from. american allies, america, china, no matter where it is? >> i think president trump is not interested in the same old charade we've seen time and time again for years with north korea and other instances. if there's going to be an agreement, they're going to have to do this first and we're going to have to be able to

verify it, and that's just the ball game, and if kim, look, if kim is understanding that all this pressure is bringing bear to him because of this program that he's clinging to, perhaps that may be a reason for him to say, you know what? i may solidify myself and power if i can do this, but it's not going to be where we're giving them money and hoping that they follow through. that is totally off the table. mark: let me ask you about this, i'm a little confused about something. on the one hand, china is stealing our technology to build up its economy, certainly the military. they have committed acts of cyber warfare against us, developing weapons that have as their purpose to attack us or neutralize our most sophisticated weapons. they've been very aggressive geopolitically including in the south china sea and in the east china sea. in other ways very, very provocative, on the other hand, we rely on them to help us with north korea. in the end, who wins out here?

china? >> i think that china will, i think everybody ends up winning out if we're successful here. south korea will be stronger, japan, the united states, that's one of the greathing about this entire conversation and all the prospects thatre possible right now. nothing is certain. and i think that for china specifically it's a complex situation, but we haven't really stood up for ourselves as a nation in pushing back on all of the complexities of that relationship. so president trump wants to -- he is showing an ability to look multidimensionally at the relationship with china. we understand there isn't a good option that doesn't involve china so working with them on north korea, but at the same time, we're trying to fix a trade imbalance. we're pushing back on patent infringement and other ways the products may be coming to market where ideas are stolen

from great american entrepreneurs and companies. so we have a challenge of having to look at this multidimensionally but the president is showing he's up to it, and i think china will respect us more for it. i think these nations like china and north korea and iran and elsewhere, they respect us when we are being strong, and when we are weak, they're watching us be weak to other nations, they smell on it and prey upon it. mark: we'll be right back. man: i got scar tissue there. same thing with any dent or dings on this truck. they all got a story about what happened to 'em. man 2: it was raining, there was only one way out. i could feel the barb wire was just digging into the paint. man: two bulls were fighting, (thud) bam hit the truck. try explaining that to your insurance company. woma another ding, another scratch. it'll juste anotr chapter inhe story. every scar tells a story, and you can tell a lot more stories when your truck is a chevy silverado.

the most dependable, longest-lasting, full-size pickups on the road. (burke) so we know how to seen cover almost anything. even a "cactus calamity". (man 1) i read that the saguaro can live to be two hundred years old. (woman) how old do you think that one is? (man 1) my guess would be, about... (man 2) i'd say about two hundred. (man 1) yeah... (burke) gives houseplant a whole new meaning. and we covered it. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

[♪] reporter: live from "america's news headquarters." president trump is meeting with singapore prime minister lee hsien loong. they are holding a working lunch meeting ahead of the summit between president trump and kim jong-un tomorrow. the president hopes to open a dialogue and begin a relationship with north korea. the historic meeting could be a leap ford toward denuclearizing the korean peninsula. one person is dead and another critically injured in a home explosion in ohio. it happened sunday afternoon in east cleveland. the blast leveling the house and setting four o others on fire. no word on what caused it.

now back to "life, liberty & levin." . mark: congressmen, you both have mentioned iran, that hangs over us like a dark cloud. and really it's an example of what not to do, right? so let's talk about this briefly. we had this iran deal, it skirted the treaty provision of the united states senate, and one of the reasons we have this treaty provision of the united states senate is so you can't skirt congress and so-called side deals have to be made available, and hamilton said that, you know, we want the full body politic involved in the treaty, and so we get into the debates what's a deal, what's a treaty? we know this, if it involves nuclear weapons and icbms and billions of dollars, that involves a treaty. that's not a deal. there's been information released in the past week that indicates that some of the testimony that was given by the

obama administration officials was flat-out dishonest about money moving from iran through our banks. you can explain that a little bit and tell us why this is a big deal? >> there was a statement in position made by the obama administration they would not allow iran access to our financial markets and fo, sdpurg after the negotiations on so many different aspects of the negotiation and the jcpoa, the obama administration was dishonest, as you mentioned as part of your comment about the treaty. secretary kerry when he came to testify in front of the senate foreign affairs committee saying the reason they didn't present it as a treaty is it wouldn't have passed. that's the legal definition? you wouldn't have gotten it passed. going to be phased in based on compliance. the irans say the relief is immediate, no suspension of actions. no uncertain terms you will not

access our military sites, they said it before, during and after the negotiation and said there was not a ransom when we had to pay cash at the same moment as releasing american hostages and one more is when they embarrassed our 10 navy sailors, secretary kerry's words in response were thank you. not even pushing back and giving a hard time for it. actually used it as an example how this is proving we have better relations the way they released our sailors. what we've learned over the course week that once again they were dishonest in a new aspect and we did allow them to have access to the dollar, to our markets and once again we have more evidence that the american public were being fed lies. it was being orchestrated at the white house. they had a white house-taxpayer-funded fiction writer, ben rhodes, using these different levers of the media and the american public to pull the wool over our eyes and get us to think that this was a

good deal, and they were, as we're learning once more, they weren't telling the truth in too many aspects. mark: congressman, this latest disclosure, they were trying to launder their currency which is worthless through our banks to get exchange for american dollars and apparently the obama administration was pressuring banks which were resisting because they said in the deal, it says we're not supposed to do this sort of thing, and same with some of the european banks, and as congressman zeldin said, there were constant representations, no, we're not going to do this sort of thing, they did do this sort of thing. what's the consequences? they lie and go on tv trashing the trump administration for everything? >> wow, the iran deal, talk about a plunder in deceit. massive amounts of money going there and built on a pack of lies. no doubt about it. what can we do going forward? one thing we did do in 2016, we elected a new president who

pledged he was going to get rid of the iran deal and president trump followed through on thamp the people who complained, oh, he violated the terms of the deal. it was never ratified as a treaty, he it wasn't statute. they didn't get a majityf congress for anything in the deal, it was an agreement effectively between barack obama and ayatollah khamenei and a new president can come in and change the policy as they see fit. totally constitutional and lawful for trump to do what he did. that's a big part of it but more and more is exposed. netanyahu with the israeli intelligence heist that they did. one of the reasons we are so concerned about the side deals initially when debating this in 2015. if you don't know what the previous military dimensions were of nuclear program, it's awfully hard to judge what they're doing going forward. they did not produce the agreements between iran and the iaea which is in violation of

the corker-cardin, a dumb law, but they didn't require, that they didn't do that. now we know there is a reason why they didn't do that. there was a robust nuclear pursuit leading up to the deal. the president did the right thing, they are going to be incumbent for congress, shut off the money to the itollas and the irgc, shutting off the money and working to open social networks in the iranian society, that society does not want to be governed by totalitarian islamists. they are much more western looking. middle class for decades. i think the more we can connect people and expand social networks there, i do think that this regime's days are numbered, and the more success we have in choking off the money and opening up the networks means their demise will be met quicker. mark: looks like the economic sanctions are working, they were working before obama stepped. in looks like they're working now. i want to ask you this question when we come back. . the democrats put out a list of

demands they expect to be met in the negotiations such as they are with the north koreans. i don't remember them putting out a list of demands for barack obama when it comes to iran. so we know they're hypocrites. we know what they're up to, unfortunately. and a major issue like this dealing with nukes. my question is, if the president comes up with a deal and it's a significant deal, and it involves nukes and involves the united states making some concessions and so forth, will we demand that it be treated as a treaty? i assume it will depend what it is because now it's just theoretical. and should we? and should we allow both political parties to take a position on this so the american people know and shouldn't every aspect be vetted so the american people know, even if it's a hostile press and hostile democratic party. when we return, i'd like you to answer that question. remember, every week night,

you can watch levin tv, crtv.com or call 844-levin tv. we'll get you all signed up and ready to go. we'll be right back. mine's way better. this one's below market price and has bluetooth. same here, but this one has leather seats! use the cars.com app to compare price, features and value.

jushis local miracle ear t at helped andrew hear more of the joy in her voice. just one hearing test is all it took for him to hear more of her laugh... and less of the background noise around him. for helen, just one visit to her local miracle-ear is all it took to learn how she can share more moments with her daughter. just one free hearing test could help you hear more... laughter...music...life... call now for your free hearing test from an industry leader: miracle-ear. where are mom and dad? 'saved money on motorcycle insurance with geico! goin' up the country. love mom and dad' i'm takin' a nap. dude, you just woke up!

♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ ♪ i'm goin' up the country, baby don't you wanna go? ♪ geico motorcycle, great rates for great rides. hi, and believe us;uys. we don't want this-- or this for father's day. we want something awesome! (man) man crates has reinvented gifting with handpicked gear and diy projects guys will love. (second man) most gifts come sealed

in a wooden crate with a crowbar. (third man) man crates! it's more than a gift; it's an experience you'll never forget. make his day this father's day. go to mancrates.com/tv for 10% off the perfect father's day gift.

. mark: i'm here with congressman lee zeldin and congressman ron desantis, candidate for governor. candidate for the election to the house of representatives. let me start with you, congressman zeldin. so my question was, okay, we get this deal. depending on what the deal is, if it's a significant deal that involves significant actions by the united states, it could well be a treaty. you have a problem with that? >> no. i would like to see what it is. i believe that the iran deal should have been submitted as a treaty, that we're on track to, if this is negotiated, it would be a treaty. now learning our lessons from iran, we should ask for a signature. we didn't even ask the iranians

to sign the jcpoa, but more than presenting a signature, present it to congress and i would be shocked. doesn't mean we'll have a unanimous vote, but the idea that these congressional democrats, that enough of them are so much against this president, that they're willing to take this down, and the consequences of what that means to american national security to servicemembers in harm's way, consequence of region for our economy, presented the treaty on its merits, let it be debated, vetted and passed. mark: you agree? >> i think it depends if it's obligating us to do something to change our laws, to have commitments vis-a-vis other countries, then that's something that should be submitted to the united states senate for ratification as a treaty. and the thing is, it does make it harder to get it across the measure line. if you get it across the finish line, it's going stick, and it's going to be difficult to repeal that at that point, so it's actually much more, the

founders understood that was the way to do it, and had obama tried that on the deal was so bad it would have been ratified. maybe it would have forced them to stop giving so many dog gone concessions because they had an eye on the senate ratifying itself. i don't think trump is going to want to submit anything he's not proud of. he's going to drive a hard bargain. mark: you agree? >> yeah, no, absolutely. i think if we were vetting out the iran deal as a treaty, then our questions about the verification regime would have gone answered. but they, through august recess, if you remember at 2015, that was going through the process, they racked up enough votes in the senate to ensure that you would be able to survive the iran nuclear agreement review act, the corker-cardon bill. once they got through the votes in the august recess. the transparency stopped, answering questions we needed answers to. iran is collecting its own soil

samples. we as members of congress are told this deal is not built on trust, it's built on verification, not only do you tell us what the regime, is you don't know yourself? john kerry as secretary of state he hasn't read the side deals between the iaea and iran? if the trump administration and anyone who has to go to committee of jurisdiction and it involves the treasury department, the energy department, this is more than just the state department. if they know they have to testify before congress and answer the questions to ensure this passes, then through the process, as ron just said, they will be working towards ensuring that we have not just the right agreement, but also the answers to those questions so they're not embarrassing themselves and they're not tanking their own deal. mark: don't the american people have a right to know what's in the deals too? our representatives need to know. you're funding some of these things, whatever, isn't that the whole point of the treaty provision. whole body politic has a right to know, our representatives

have a right to know. the senate. you need a supajorityo pass it. what they did on the iran deal is flipped it on its head. corker-cardon deal was you needed a super majority in congress to stop the obama deal, and as it turns out, you didn't even know what you were voting on because you didn't get the information on the side deals and this information that comes out today where, they were absolutely deceiving congress, which is, they were pressing banks in america and overseas to basically launder that iranian currency to help the iranian economy, though they told you guys they weren't going to do that. >> the founders, from them watching down on the iran debate, they were all rolling over in their graves. that is exactly what they didn't want in terms of how to conduct american foreign policy. not just in terms of the substance of it, that would be problematic to them. just the accountability factor and the fact it is something to represent the will of the

american people, and the fact is the iran deal did not represent the will of the american people. all they need to do is get 41 votes to filibuster the resolution of disapproval. how nuts is that? so it was absolutely not the right way to go, and yes, for north korea, the american people have a right to know what the country is committing to and what that requires of our nation. mark: we'll be right back.

. mark: congressman desantis and zeldin, you both had a big role in pressing this government, before trump was elected, to follow what congress said should be done, which is move the embassy in israel from tel aviv to jerusalem. the president campaigns on it, he actually does it, then he's attacked for, it even though congress -- it's the law, even though he did it. you were in israel. what did you see in israel when you there were when the embassy was opened in jerusalem? >> well, it was an act of a friendly nation paying respects to an ally. it's their capital. it's been their capital for thousands of years, going back to biblical times and so the president doing that fulfilled, as you said, longstanding u.s. law, i think it has implications beyond israel because it showed leadership where other presidents have not been willing to lead and take the heat and you will see beneficial aspects of foreign

policy beyond those borders, and so i think when you're leading with purpose and conviction, good things happen, hey, let's recognize the golan heights, israeli sovereignty, we're on a roll, get this done, absolutely. mark: so he recognizes jerusalem as the capital of israel. he moves the embassy like you said he would, he kills the iran deal which is a disastrous deal, like he said he would, and the left is attacking him for not only doing what he said, but many of them actually voted to move the embassy, schumer and others, and when it comes to the iran deal, the left doesn't know exactly what's in the iran deal, but they back it regardless. what do you make of what the president did? >> he is not fulfilling his own campaign promises but the campaign promises of presidents in the past, and most importantly the right thing to do, because as ron just said, it is israel's capital. and we are standing strong shoulder to shoulder with our nation's if not our nation's

greatest allies, you have a free beacon of democracy in every region of world and we're standing with them. and leadership showed the next day with guatemala moving their embassy and paraguay and other countries talking about moving their embassies, the president did the right thing and what the american people may not recognize is that the streets were lined up with signs that were pro-usa, pro-trum five-story tall signs on the de of buildings. mark: they love trump in israel, don't they? >> thousands of thousands, you were there, we saw this firsthand. thousands up thousands of kids, israeli kids holding up american flags and israeli flags and cheering, clapping and chanting, it was all good and treating israel like israel, iran like iran. mark: what message do you think north korea took out of this? >> that there's a new sheriff in town. that barack obama is not the president of the united states and president trump is not only

willing to stand up to adversaries and treat them as adversaries and be strong, but also build stronger relationships with friends when you aracing like a good world citizen, when you are working with us, we'll work with you, and it will be better for both countries. mark: what do you think north korea saw? >> they saw a strong president. we had a weak president for eight years, and other presidents before him made the same commitment as obama, they didn't follow through on it. this president did. that he cancels the iran deal. that is a sign of strength, and especially in that region and rogue regimes, the strong horse is who they respect. hey! we didn't have a homeowners claim last year so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. well, that seems fair. we didn't use it. wish we got money back on gym memberships. get money back hilarious. with claim-free rewards. switching to allstate is worth it.

it's me. your sleep number 360 smart bed... checking in. last night i warmed your feet so you fell asleep faster. i sensed you roll over and automatically softened your side to melt away pressure points and keep you sleeping blissfully. at 2am, this happened. so, i took care of it. does your bed do that? i'm the new sleep number 360 smart bed. now you can wake up to smarter sleep. let's meet, only at a sleep number store. (dnice, candace, but this time bold. did someone say "bold?" (gasping) starkist jalapeo tuna in a pouch! loaded with bold flavor. just tear, eat... mmmmm. and go bold! try all of my bold creations pouches!

you always get the lowest price on our rooms, guaranteed?m let's get someone to say it with a really low voice. carl? lowest price guaranteed. what about the world's lowest limbo stick? how low can you go? nice one, carl. hey i've got an idea. just say, badda book. badda boom. badda book. badda boom. nice. always the lowest price, guaranteed. book now at choicehotels.com mark: final question for the north korean summit with the president. successful or not? >> he wrote the art of the deal and condone if you not dissented from that lineage he'd be living

in someone's patient and eating tito's. i like our presidents chances here. he will tell kim jong-un to go pound sand. >> the stars are aligned and i think he will make these concessions and i do have faith that we are prepared for it and we are going in any way for all the workas done in advance and we will not get rolled at the table the same way barack obama got rolled with iraq. mark: he is quite widely with a great team. you got pompeo and bolton and others. i think it will work out well. we still need to see what comes out of this because he won't be president forever. you have to figure out how to enforce it on future presidents who might be at the left so, i

agree with you. it's been a great pleasure having both of you. thank you for your service to your country before in congress and thank you for your service now. good luck on reelection and your race for governor. i will see you next time on "life, liberty and levin". we will see you next weekend. chris: i'm chris wallace, live in singapore where president trump has just arrived for his historic summit with north korea's kim jong un. >> it's a one-time shot and i think it's going to work out very well. chris: this hour we will preview high-risk, high-reward and discuss what's at stake at president trump presses kim to give up nuclear and long-range missiles that pose a growing threat to the u.s. asking veteran diplomats about the challenge of negotiating with the north koreans. then the president's other