>> schieffer: april bob schieffer today on "face the nation." is the united states close to a deal to limit iran's nuclear power. >> we have not yet reached the finish line. but make no mistake we have the opportunity to try to get this right. >> schieffer: but if a deal is made will congress go along and what about the new isis terror threats? we'll talk to the foreign relations committee chairman bob corker. we'll hear from the house majority leader kevin mccarthy and democrat tulsi gabbard. also san francisco 49er rocky linebacker chris borland shocked the sports world by quitting the nfl. we'll talk to him about his concerns that football is too violent. and we'll have analysis on all the news because this is "face the nation."

captioning sponsored by cbs and good morning again. secretary of state john kerry is back in washington after nearly a week now in negotiation with iranian leaders over curbing iran's nuclear program. there is no deal yet u.s. and allys are pressing for more inspections and tighter restrictions on iran's ability to enrich uranium. the talks are going to resume thursday we turn first to the chairman of the foreign relations committee senator bob corker of tennessee. senator, thank you so much. what is your understanding at this hour of where the iran nuclear talks stand? >> well, i think bob that we're very close to political agreement. i talked to senator kerry on thursday, vice president biden on thursday. it appears that we're close to political agreement.

i think most people understand that that is sort of a broad framework and final deal would be arrived at with all the detail, those types of things by the end of june. >> schieffer: last week 47 republicans in the senate signed a letter sent it to iranian leaders telling them to be weary of signing a deal with the obama administration unless the congress approves the deal. now you did not sign that letter. what i want to ask you is, are you for a deal or are you just want to see that the senate approves it? >> i don't know of anyone that doesn't want negotiated agreement with iran that is a good deal. one that will stand the test of time. i think the concern has been from day one that we keep moving from our initial position,

towards iran's position. so there's a concern that administration cares more about making a deal versus the right deal. i think you know that one of the things that brought iran to the table where they congressional lehman dated sanctionss, the u.n. security sanctions but congress played a vital role getting iran to the table. what we'd like to see happen and ranking member menendez on both sides of the aisle is to ensure that before any deal is implemented that congress has the ability to weigh in on the front end before the congressional lehman dated sanction, is that we put in place are taken off the table and suspended ad innfinitum there is concern about the type of deal but i don't know of anyone that wouldn't like to see this come to a good end by an arrange. that would keep iran from getting a nuclear weapon. but the question obviously is

great concern what the trend is towards iran's position. >> schieffer: do you think that that letter that the republican signed, did it complicate this in any way? >> look, bob there's been a lot of drama around this issue. i didn't think it was something that was productive toward the end that i'm thinking. if there is an arrangement we appropriately weigh in. been a lot of drama back and forth. administration in israel are more strange than ever. there's been a lot of issues. but look, we're going to be -- moving towards what it looks like a deal, i think that the vast majority of people on both sides of the aisle are very sober and thoughtful about this. what we cannot do is let drama take us off our course of, again, congress playing appropriate role. it has been fascinating, bob.

i wake up every day trying to do everything i can to move foreign policy ahead to work with everyone. and i've never seen such resistance by an administration towards a responsible role for congress. i think that is obviously created some of the drama that you're referring to right now. it's unprecedented. people who looked at the piece of legislation that we put forth have said, why wouldn't the administration embrace that because if congress were to embrace the deal with iran it has much better chance of standing the test of time. what is going to happen, i fear, first of all what i fear most that entering into arrangement that really allows iran to get a nuclear weapon and by the way releases $130 billion of resources to them to continue to carry out the operations like we're seeing in yemen. but we've seen in syria so many other places. i fear that. but what i also fear is that

they're going to negotiate a deal, the way they go about it it ends up being the central element, if you will, in this presidential campaign because they didn't get american buy in. instead of doing something that ends up resolving an issue it becomes even more unresolved. >> schieffer: do you think this is all the fault of the administration? you don't think that some of the tactics the republicans have used might have added to this friction here? >> well, look, i don't think anybody when you get into situation like this, i don't think any group has acted in a perfect manner. as i mentioned there are a lot of tensions, a lot of drama. but let's face it. they have been pushing congress away from this from day one. this has gone back for a long time. please remember, bob menendez signed on. chuck schumer is supportive of this legislation. bob, regardless of some of the drama the fact is we have a

building strong bipartisan consensus that at the end. day before anything is implemented, congress should hat east be able to say grace over the fact that these sanction, is that we put in place that brought iran to the table we ought to be able to analyze this deal as is the norm and say grace up or down as to whether or not we think those -- >> schieffer: what happened if there is no deal? obviously nobody wants a bad deal. but let's say two sides just can't get together, what do you do then? >> there's a couple of things that can happen. we do have the interim deal in place. it could continue for some time. >> schieffer: keeps the sanctions? >> it keeps existing sanctions in place there some some sanction for iran it stays in place. >> schieffer: don't the iranians just press ahead with

their nuclear program? why wouldn't they? >> i don't think that's necessarily the case. the other is congress reacts and puts in place the menenez piece which puts even more pressure in place. but look at the end of the day i do think that this deadline, the fact that the p5 plus one negotiations about seven weeks ago gave way to bilateral negotiations between united states and iran, now all the groups are back involved. i think we saw at that time, bob, a huge movement, if you will, towards iran's position. and as we see them, not coming more -- becoming more responsible how they're dealing with so many issues in the region, what we see them doing is ratcheting up their activities. so again i hope we end up with a good deal that stands the test of time, negotiations are the very best way of doing that.

the other options are certainly not pleasant but we can also maintain the status quo for some period of time until iran becomes mr. serious about allowing us to know that they're not conducting covert activity. that their research and development activities aren't moving to a place that accelerates their ability to create nuclear weapons. that we understand what their previous military dimensions were to stop the 2003. we have access to the scientists and others that were developing what we know at that time was a move towards a nuclear weapon. we can -- i think secretary kerry is right. let's get it right. let's not rush to a place where we end up with a deal that does not stand the test of time. and further destabilize the region. >> schieffer: thank you so much senator, for joining us this morning. now we go to the other side of the capital house majority leader republican kevin mccarthy he's in bakersfield california this morning.

mr. mccarthy, do you think full congress has to be on record supporting this deal or senate obviously wants to vote on it, do you think the house ought to vote on it, too? >> the house should have some responsibility because just as mr. corker said the house is one of the individuals that passed the sanction that brought iran to the table. regardless of what happens we have responsibility with whether lifting the sanction or imposing greater sanctions. we will continue to review when we go forward. >> schieffer: the house did play a role in this debate going on by inviting prime minister netanyahu to come and address joint session of congress, the administration, of course, considered that a snub. where do you think israeli american relations are at this point? >> well, i would tell you that from the president and administration they're trying to make this about the prime

minister netanyahu. it's not about him. it's not about the administration. this is about the mutual concern we have for iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. i will tell you that the special relationship that america has with the israeli people transcends any of the politics. this administration should be better than that. that prime minister netanyahu has been re-elected, we have a unique relationship, we should build that instead of trying to make it personal. >> schieffer: let me ask you about something else. this week house republicans formally asked secretary of state clinton to turn over her private e-mail server to the state department inspector general or a third examiner. why do you think that is necessary? >> well, i think it's clearly fair. because first i think the american people have right to know the truth. i think secretary clinton has responsibility to tell it. we're not interested in her private e-mails.

we're not even interested in her e-mails regarding russia or syria, only those pertaining to benghazi. she is the individual that created this. we think a third party inspector general at the state department could have a responsibility to know which is responsible just for benghazi, the sensitivity to all the different e-mails. >> schieffer: do you think at this point that she may have done something illegal? >> well, bob, i don't know. if you were secretary of state would you set up a server and put it in your own house and then ask top aides only to use that only use your attorney to determine what is that of the public or not. we have federal act when it comes to how to use it. i think she brings a lot of doubt with her own use. but she has the ability to clear

this up. she has responsibility to tell the truth to the american public and she can release them. >> schieffer: is what you're saying she was just trying to make sure she didn't leave a paper trail here for the decisions she made on benghazi and other things? >> she was there for five years i think she started the process. i don't know of anybody else they go into the federal government creates a server in their own house. i just think american people had right to the truth and she knows the responsibility that she has going to a third party it's fair, it's clear we don't want any of the e-mails we don't want to go through them. just give us the e-mails pertaining to benghazi. and this to be forwarded to the american public. >> schieffer: let me go back to the whole situation with terror, we saw two horrible terror incidents this week. now we hear that isis has sent personal information about a hundred members of the military

out and told people to attack them or do something in some way. do we have at this point a coherent strategy to fight isis? >> i think the president has been consistently wrong with this. this goes into the concern with any agreement with iran. think what this administering has told the american public. first that we have -- know that is not true today. then that isis was a jv team. then the president said just few months ago that yemen is the example to the foreign policy it came to the middle east. now he wants to trust us on getting a deal with iran not able to obtain a nuclear weapon. i believe the administration has misinterpreted the entire arab spring. that is the concern we have. you look at the president sent to congress authorization for

use of military force he constrains the military even further to combat isis. he has more authority today than when he's asking going forward. the problems we're having today around the world are because of this administration redirection of our foreign policy that puts more emphasis on defending our enemy instead of supporting our allies and creating chaos around the world. >> schieffer: i want to stop you there an thank you very much for being with us this morning. we're going to welcome now congresswoman tulsi gabbard democrat from hawaii to the broadcast, first time on "face the nation." she sits on both the armed services and the foreign affairs committees. and before her election served two tours in iraq in the u.s. army. >> thanks for having me here. >> schieffer: thanks very much congresswoman. you heard this thing that's come out about isis sending out this information on a hundred members of the military. do you know anything more about this? >> i think this is exactly the kind of tactic that we are

starting to see increase not only here but in ear parts of the world where islamic extremists terrorist elements are looking to different so-called soft targets. the unconventional approach they're taking to this war that they're waging not only against united states but to anyone who doesn't follow their vein of this radical islamic ideology. >> you are a democrat, of course, but not been afraid to criticize the administration on occasion on these matters. should we be doing something differently now in this war on terror than what we're doing? >> we should be. i think as we have just passed the 12th anniversary of the invasion of iraq in the beginning of the iraq war i think it's important that we look at what are the lessons learned from that war. as we look at this, we see these very clear need for a clear and winning strategy. this is not something that can only be done militarily, right

alongside the military strategy which must consist of working with our partners in the region and must consist with working with the sunnis and kurds and really going to the heart of the sectarian conflict, right alongside that military strategy must be a political one. again that goes to this sectarian divide that allowed iraq isis to grow and really increase in its strength and presence there. when we looked at the continuation of the failed bush policy now in this administration of propping up this shia-led government in baghdad that is heavily influenced by iran, this is what caused essentially for isis to grow. >> schieffer: do you see these shia militia as being more dangerous than say isis, because i think general petraeus said something to that affect recently. >> i think whether it's more or less you have to look at the core set of problems here, that the shia militia being there

continuing to oppress and persecute the sunnis what is causing isis to grow in strength. that's a fact. we look what is happening in tikrit, we look what we expect in mosul to my knowledge i've asked questions of military leaders here and members of the administration there is no clear plan in place for sunni people to take charge of these sunni dominated parts of iraq which is the only thing that would prevent isis from coming back in, even if there is a military victory. >> schieffer: how important is it that congress pass some kind of authorization that the president wants to authorize the war against isis and terrorists? >> this authorization goes to the military question. before we examine that again we've got to look at what are the overall strategy to defeat this threat before we drill down the details. without a winning strategy whether this president or the next president we're not getting to the heart of the problem

here. i think another issue with authorization that the president put forward administration is very clear that they will continue the military action, is that they're conducting with or without this authorization to use military force going back to that 2001. that this only needs to be passed as message or symbol to the american people. i think that is where you're seeing lack of urgency. even as we look at that on its face we have to go to the deeper question of what is the strategy here? what are we going to do mil rarely politically and ideologically to defeat this enemy. >> schieffer: all right congresswoman thank you so much. hope you'll come back to see us. we'll be back in one minute with some personal thoughts. 80% of the poor in africa are rural farmers. 96% of them are doing rain-fed agriculture. they're all competing with each other; they're all making very low margins making enough to survive but not enough to get out of poverty.

so kickstart designs low cost irrigation pumps enabling them to grow high value crops throughout the year so you can make a lot of money. it's all very well to have a whole lot of small innovations but unless we can scale it up enough to where we are talking about millions of farmers, we're not going to solve their biggest challenge. this is precisely where the kind of finance that citi is giving us is enabling us to scale up on a much more rapid pace. when we talk to the farmers and ask them what's the most important thing. first of all they say we can feed our families. secondly, we can send our children to school. it's really that first step that allows them to get out of poverty and most importantly have money left over to plan for the future they want. >> schieffer: so the prime minister of is he real doesn't like the president has decided dealing with this administration

is no walk in the park. i get that. there are some in washington including some democrats who feel the same way. and the president thinks the prime minister dissed him when he spoke to the joint session of congress without a presidential invitation. i get that, too. it was not just rude but disrespectful to the office. and, yes, i can understand why the president would be upset when the prime minister blindsided him said he no longer favored the creation of a palestinian state, long favored by the united states and israel. yet when the prime minister backed away from that thursday, the white house reacted with pointed, even snarky skepticism as if they wanted to keep the public going. i question that. sure the white house is upset but let's remember what's important here and it is not who gets the last word on twitter. there have been hard to take insults from both sides but the relationship between israel and

america is unique. and israel is the only true democracy in that part of the world. we need israel and israel needs us. it's time to stop the back and forth and repair the alliance quietly. nothing makes america and israel's enemies happy than believing relationship between israel and america is unraveled. right now they have to wonder. back in a minute. do you have something for pain? i have bayer aspirin.

i'm not having a heart attack, it's my back. i mean bayer back & body. it works great for pain. bayer back & body provides effective relief for your tough pain. better? yeah...thanks for the tip!

doing this all day, my feet and legs got really tired. so i got dr. scholl's massaging gel work insoles. they absorb the shock of working on my feet all day. i feel energized! i'm a believer. dr. scholl's massaging gel work insoles. i'm a believer! bob we turn to the other story that is getting noticed in every home in america where there are growing kids. that is the nfl and league's ongoing problems with concussions, last week rookie

linebacker for the san francisco 49ers, chris borland stunned the sports world by announcing he was retiring because he cited fierce over his long term health. chris, thank you so much for coming. you are literally walking away probably from millions of dollars. one year in the nfl you say you're going to quit. why did you talk away? >> well thanks for having me, mr. schieffer. to me the decision was simple after i had done a lot of research it was personal. i was concerned about neurological diseases down the road if i continued to play football. i did a lot of research, gathered a lot of research to me the decision made sense. >> schieffer: was there one event, was there one play that led you to this decision? >> there was a moment in camp where i probably sustained a mild concussion. it wasn't something that was detrimental to my health immediately. but it just changed the way i viewed the risks of my chosen profession, i don't want to go

down where for years i was doing something that could ultimately be detrimental to my health. >> schieffer: so you just said i'm willing going to do it. >> i thought i would. i wrote my parents a letter before the season, said my career may be brief for those concerns. did a lot of research throughout the season and afterwards came to the conclusion, yes best decision for me. >> schieffer: we'll ask you to hold on for a moment. we'll have more of this conversation coming up we'll be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ great rates for great rides. geico motorcycle see how much you could save. you can't predict the market. but at t. rowe price

we've helped guide our clients through good times and bad. our experienced investment professionals are one reason over 85% of our mutual funds beat their 10-year lipper averages. so in a variety of markets we can help you feel confident. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence. sunday dinners at my house... it's a full day for me, and i love it. but when i started having back pain my sister had to come help. i don't like asking for help. i took tylenol but i had to take six pills to get through the day. so my daughter brought over some aleve. it's just two pills, all day! and now, i'm back! aleve. two pills. all day strong, all day long. and now introducing aleve pm for a better am.

>> schieffer: some of our stations are leaving us now. but for most of you we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation" including more from chris borland our panel and update on some other sports. stay with us.

[captioning funded by cbs sports division] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you are always one shot one rebound from losing or winning. everything is on the line. you have to be the best you can at every level up to grind it. one shot one night.