hold iran to account. let's get back to that. fourth, walking away from the nuclear deal would be a disaster for the united states. iran would resume its march towards nuclear capability and the rest of the world would be deeply skeptical about joining us in rebuilding global sanctions regime. without a deal we would be faced with the same painful choices we are currently facing with north korea. these are choices -- we already have to grapple with one nuclear crisis right now as this committee knows well. why would the administration want to create a second one? this defies not only sound strategic thinking but also simple common sense. thank you and i look forward to answering wrour questiyour ques >> in august i was in the middle east and i wanted to ask ambassador jeffrey a question here because you made it very clear that allowing iran to complete the land bridge or the corridor across iraq and syria to lebanon would risk in your words a strategic defeat. and i wondered if you could explain to us what

to business with iran.o if congress reimposes those anctions, that is the stick they hold over companies in europe, the idea they will get kept out of the u.s. system if they do business with iran. that is a big, significant point. i want to make sure people understand that. treta, please go ahead. giving rsi: not about recommendation, i want to share what i think they are likely to do. think is perhaps good in the sense of making sure that the deal doesn't get killed, i think that would be bad if it was. right now, notice they are relatively low profile, i think that is because of their calculation that trump is shooting himself in the foot, the united states and as a result, they have no nterest in interfering while he's doing that. the area i really worry about, articularly when combined with the suggestions, some of them quite explicit about regime hange, that will lead to much, much tougher position of iran in the region, rather than seeing contrary, we he will see them become more aggressive in the re

iran, in time, will become a nuclear state.north korea is a nuclear state that i don't think can hit the united states right now, but they are coming to that point. the country that has the problem with iran is israel and israel is a technological superstate,ic however the geographics are very small. basically, the size of rhode island. you need is to nuclear warheads to hit israel and israel ceases to exist. you can't stop it, you can only slow down, and one other thing, israel and saudi arabia today, they've got like a quiet alliance. they have to keep it quiet. saudi arabia, sunni muslim, iran is shiite muslim, they are at each other's throat.

importantly, iran is not living up to the spirit of the deal. so today, in recognition of the increasing men ace imposed by iran and after extensive consultations with our allies, i'm announcing a new strategy to address the full range of iran's destructive actions. first, we will work with our importantly, iran is not living up to the spirit of the deal. so today, in recognition of the increasing men ace imposed by iran and after extensive consultations with our allies, i'm announcing a new strategy to address the full range of iran's destructive actions. first, we will work with our allies to counter the regime's destabilizing activity and support for terrorists' proxies in the region. second, we will place additional sanctions on the regime to block their financing of terror. third, we will address the regime's proliferation of missiles and weapons that threaten its neighbors. and finally we will deny the regime, all paths to a nuclear weapon. today, i'm also announcing several major steps my administration is taking in pursuit of this strate

law that was passed after the conclusion of the iran nuclear deal the agreement between iran and six world powers and the european union and he said president trump said yesterday that in his opinion the sanctions relief granted to iran under the deal is not proportionate to the steps that iran has taken to restrict to severely restrict its nuclear activities and so what that does is it opens the door to congress reconsidering the application of sanctions or other legislation relating to the deal and we've heard from senator bob corker the chairman of the foreign relations committee that he is going to be pursuing legislation that would impose additional sanctions on iran if iran does not extend the limits the time that the limits are due to apply to iran and that amounts to a unilateral attempt to renegotiate the iran nuclear deal and that's why iran the europeans are saying that they're going to stand by the agreement they're not going to stand for a unilateral attempt to renegotiate the terms of this international accord now what congress does we're not quite sure we're going to h

inspections continue in iran under the iran's agreement with the i.a.e.a. pursuant to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and then there are separate mental inspections under the joint comprehensive plan of action and i.a.e.a. already has the authority under iran's voluntary implementation of its additional protocol to seek access to sites that are not declared as nuclear but there is a mechanism under way iran can provide satisfaction to their concerns short of providing access and there is something called managed access under-weight you're on good except the visits to military sites. on specific for specific purposes were persist so to speak a frog or as i do would you like to respond to that's my guest from vienna and also tell us does this in any way if the deal worth one raval if a tram does decertified and then congress impose a sanctions does this encourage iran then to restart its nuclear program. yes i think if the u.s. gets out of the new can in agreement it would be difficult for the iranian government to a say in it because after all the major

charlie: you being iran. when saddam was invading kuwait, he wanted iran to join and suggested if he was successful that iran and kuwait and iraq would share the spoils. >> and he sent all his fighter jets to iran, but we did not take the bait. we did not join the coalition, but we helped kuwait. we were the first country to condemn the iraqi invasion of kuwait. equally important historical fact for people to remember. charlie: characterize your relationship with the united states today. [laughter] >> do i need to? charlie: please do. >> i think the united states is making a strategic mistake of sending a message to the world it is not reliable as a negotiating partner. in any deal, to reach a deal, you give concessions and you take concessions on the other side. no deal will be sustainable if you take concessions and ask for more after. nobody else will negotiate with the united states. the united states will become known as an unreliable partner. i believe even europeans are saying if the united states were

to certifying the iran deal.epartment spokesperson under president obama, part of negotiating that iran deal. david webb, radio host on a sirius xm patriot channel. first of all, the president almost doing the state department's job there and elevating the idea of diplomacy along with strength. >> it's something you heard from president obama, talking directly to the people, that has been a constant theme of american policy. while we have disagreements with the governments, the regime and their activities in the region, we have said our disagreement is not with the iranian people, many of whom are very young, under the age of 30 and want to be part of the world community. >> harris: it is an interesting point on this day that he chose to do that. remember the green revolution, we didn't get involved in that and even people like hillary clinton said we should have. now the president is saying i am doing something that will also be for the iranian people. >> there is something different and what president obama did

the people of iran, the people syriaq, iran, yemen, and and the region -- we continue to resist terrorist groups that have been created by the united states, and they will not stand until these terrorist groups have been terminated, annihilated. powerful force that is popular among the young iranian people and has been standing behind their people before the war on iran fought against anti-iran agents after the revolution, fault them. fought them head on. and and stood against the invaders and the rijac has fled said yes to the call of support from the oppressed people of the middle east. is this a corrupt force? or the government and armed forces that have always done inrything to interfere the independence and sovereignty of different countries in the region. is this a government dictator that is only elected by the people? the government is being supported by the u.s. and they have a tribal system that manages the country, that has never seen, never had an election in their country. a regime that continues to oppress the people of palestine, lebanon and others. you support that regime.

, iran, iran. the iranian government is make up of various factions. i mean, who is really in charge? i guess i'm just -- >> this is exactly the point. iran has dynamic domestic iran has dynamic domestic political situation, so if you're trying to think to yourself, how do we improve iranian behavior or get them to make concessions on our interests, the question is how do you do it. there are people who believe browbeating, hostile rhetoric, threats of war are likely to get a positive response. they either capitulate, or continue to be pains in the butt. more sober minded people understand inside domestic situation, there are hard liners and moderates and if you do things that concede certain things to the other side when you make compromises, it tends to empower moderates who can do the compromises. now with trump, as trita wisely said, the hard liners in iran are bolstered because they are proving right. these guys warned against trusting the united states from the beginning and we're just satisf

we have people in iran, azeris in iran, kurds in iran. all of whom feel they are oppressed. we haven't even ratcheted up any of the pressure on them even ask iran, the mullah dictators thumb their nose at us and take the money but don't comply fully with the expectations of that treaty. we need leadership here. we can't wait for more than 99% certainty before we act. and there are avenues that are nonmilitary confrontational. i would hope that we act. and i wish our president well. our chairman, ed royce, in his opening statement, chairman royce mentioned the fact that there are people in iran who are not our enemies. the people of iran are not our enemies. it's the mullah regime. just like the people of north korea are not our enemies. we've got to be realistic in our approach and not try to ignore realities if we're going to have a bet earn more peaceful future. i will give -- i have 20 seconds more. if anyone can -- mr. sullivan, go ahead and disagree with me. go ahead. mr. sullivan: i ask unanimous consent to give additional time to disagree. i wouldn't substitute the ju

to iran and iran to the united states, then $1.3 billion of interest. hey said it wasn't a ransom. $1.7 billion in cold, hard cash in pallets that have to get delivered at the exact same of the american hostages, by the way, not all of them, at the exact same moment of the american hostages being released. and we're saying that that's not ransom. that was a coincidence that we're signing documents in the middle of january on the same exact day, within 24 hours of each other. now, after we provided a jackpot of sanctions relief in exchange for this very one-sided deal, there was an election. after that election in iran, members of the american media and around the world, they said, this was evidence of progress in iran. that the most moderate candidates were elected. but you know what that completely ignores? the 12,000 most moderate candidates not being allowed ccess to the ballot. we're propping up the wrong regime. and after our american sailors were detained, held hostage, and embarrassed in videos and photography all around the world, we said, thank

it's not i in iran. we are a country that is confident of its power, confident of its size, confident of its people. we don't purchase security from outside. we get our security from our own people. >> rose: suggesting that the saudis are purchasing their security from outside? >> i'm not suggesting. ( laughter ) >> rose: what is iran's attitude and what is its program having to do with the development an deployment of missiles which is mott part of -- not part of the nuclear deal? >> thank you for reminding us it's not part of the nuclear deal. but you see, you want to deal with missiles, you need to look at our history. >> rose: you argue they are for deterrence purposes. >> they are. >> rose: you can imagine other people don't necessarily assume they should accept at your face value your definition of what they're about. >> fine. what we need to do is look at the facts. last year, saudi arabia spent $67 billion on weapons. the united arab emirates, which is, what, less than a million, we are 80 millio

iran, i canjust imagine, iran makes a lot of the fact, it is one of the defining national interests,f sanctions and it wasn't lost on many that the rising influence in iraq, in lebanon, in yemen, in syria, happened under sanctions. so sanctions are not, iran will carry out its strategic objective. it has never been afraid of sanctions, but it is a country where people expect benefits from the nuclear deal. if this puts a halt to new investments in iran, it's going to have an effect both on iranian politics with the hardliners. what we said including iran's supreme leader, go ahead and negotiate, but we don't trust the americans. there must be a lot of people in tehran saying i told you so. people in tehran saying i told you so. let's bring in barbara plett—usher. how did what we heard from donald trump compare to what we have been expecting? from donald trump compare to what we have been expecting ?|j from donald trump compare to what we have been expecting? i think pretty much as advertised. a long description of iran's allegedly bad behaviour. he sees it as a terrorist nation as he

through the deeply controversial 2015 nuclear deal with iran. this deal is known as the joint comprehensive plan of action or jcpoa. as i have said many times, the iran deal was one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the united states has ever entered into. the same mindset that produced this deal is responsible for years of terrible trade deals that have sacrificed so many millions of jobs in our country to the benefit of other countries. we need negotiators who will much more strongly represent america's interests. he nuclear deal through iran's dictatorship provided relief from the intense domestic pressure the sanctions had created. it also gave the regime an immediate financial boost. and over $100 billion, its government could use to fund terrorism. the regime also received a massive cash settlement of $1.7 billion from the united states, a large portion of which was physically loaded on to an airplane and flown into iran. just the imgirn the sight of those huge piles of money being hauled off by the iranians waiting at the airpo

this is iran iran did want just the u.s. doing inspections. it wanted this to be a multilateral process. it wanted this to be many states that it was to do with not just one. the negotiations were actually set out the way. we often talk as if the jcpoa was a u.s. armenia bilateral relationship. it is in. it was negotiated by the p5+1. p5+1. that's a permanent members of the u.s. security council plus germany working with iran to achieve this do. and so the way it was negotiated basically these inspections in the hands of the international atomic energy agency to make their impartial assessment that comes with iran felt comfortable with this. that being said i think we would all be foolish to assume that the u.s. intelligence community is not doing its own assessments of these issues. and everything that has been publicly stated about this suggests that use intelligence community please iran is in compliance. we are not just the words of the international atomic energy agency on this. we also use our own resources to figure out if iran is in co

or bombing iran. the price was they took some of the sanctions to get the concessions. you ask about our their flaws in the deal about inspections of sites? this is one of the canards. this is one of the issues that robustly negotiated. there are no military site that are off-site, that the iea cannot inspect. if somebody else provides to the iea and says we suspect -- and not on some kind of white w -- kind of a whim --that there was activity at one site, there is a process for that to happen, much tighter than what exists with virtually any other country. the notion that there are hundreds of sites that the iaea cannot inspect, it is true what the iranians to the pond is you cannot go on a chase and say we think there's a nuclear device in the supreme leader's bathroom so we will inspect it. that was something they said they were worried about. iaea to not want the inspect it. thatu have some evidence, they refuse access and refuse any of the compromises, then we are in a different world. we are not

policy towards iran. well he's not pulling out of the deal yet but he's setting in chain a series of events which could lead to its collapse or him pulling out as the latest sage because he certainly made that threat very clear he said the deal will be terminated if he thinks that is the way to go i would describe the tone of this as yet another flame throwing speech from the u.s. president just about a month ago at the u.n. general assembly a speech about north korea and iran and this is very much a similar tone from president trump and very marked contrast i can tell you from a conference call that was had just a matter of hours ago with the u.s. secretary of state rex tillerson and the national security council national security advisor h.r. mcmaster where they were explaining this the technical detail and it was nothing like this the sort of tone that you heard there they were making it quite clear that under strict technical terms of the deal that iran was in compliance president trump said no there

iran nuclear deal the multilateral agreement called for iran to shelve its disputed nuclear program and in exchange the international community would ease sanctions trump accused iran of violating the quote spirit of the agreement but stop short of canceling the deal instead he's called on u.s. lawmakers and international partners to fix its flaws in the agreement stipulates that the us president must certify to congress that iran is complying with the agreement every ninety days iran has trumped excuse me had done this twice before but has now refused to sign ahead of sunday's deadline now congress must decide whether to reimpose sanctions and scrap the deal here is more of what trump had to say importantly iran is not living up to the spirit of the deal so today in recognition of the increasing menace posed by iran and after extensive consultations with our allies i am announcing a new strategy to address the full range of iran's destructive actions i am announcing today that we cannot and will not make this certification we will not continue down a path whose predictable conclusion i

the fact iran is angry -- i see reporters saying, iran is angry. this is terrible.s if iran is angry, that shows the president is doing the right thing. iran is the cause of violence and terror in the world. they're angry about what the president is doing, that's an ar fir mags the president is doing the right thing. >> add goolz to talk to you. >> thank you. >>> meantime n california, the death toll climbing. drishgs windy weather threatening to make the monstrous fires there even more dangerous. we'll go live for the very latest. >>> what will the response from congress be now that president trump has decertified the nuclear deal. that's next stwl. ♪fly me to the moon ♪ ♪and let me play amon-- (ding) (bell mnemonic) but he's got work to do. with a sore back. so he took aleve this morning. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. tylenol can't do that. aleve. all day strong. all day long. also try aleve direct therapy with tens technology for lower back pa

we are very unhappy with iran.ve not treated us with the kind of respect that they should be treating. they should have thanked barack obama for making the deal. there were gone, they were economically gone. he infused $150 billion into their economy. he gave them 1.7 million dollars in cash -- $1.7 billion in cash and they should thank him. they did not say that. >> [indiscernible] >> we are stuttering -- we are studying national emergency. doing national emergency is a very big statement. we will be doing that, my wife, millennia, finds that subject to be of such vital importance. she is very much involved. she is on the committee and wants to be involved in that process. >> [indiscernible] they would love me to say it only for one reason. look at the kind of money being spent. iran is spending money and very countries. i have always said it might say to them, don't do anything and don't worry about it. take all the money you can get. they are all friends of mine. actually, emcalluel up any talk to me and i said

and in the past iran used p k k as a leverage against turkey but today as iran is visiting iran it seems that both countries share a common purse fictive when it comes to the territorial integrity in both syria and iraq and must warrant that doesn't mean that these countries will keep on miss nora if i can bring you in here now if they can be on the same page about the kurds what about the issue of syrian president bashar al assad which they've been on opposing sides of you know have the military successes of the kurds and syria which have greatly worried turkey and with crucial support from the u.s. have they pushed turkey to re-evaluate their priorities and syria were pushing back against kurdish gains you know is more important now than regime. change which they have been very silent on recently i think there is an issue to address before that which is the one that inside iraqi kurdistan. business is divided between the arraign ians and the turks so in this in this case it's very difficult to have them on one line because in iraqi kurdistan one goes with the main party k d p and barza

iran.so, i'm going to ask the piano to comment each and hopefully briefly an interesting pleased on how you see it, starting with you. >> brief and interesting. >> well, i look at the brief part right, hopefully. >> terrorism is a strategic option of the iranian state. it is actually they have does a proxy and also there was a time terror muslim was considered as a weapon of considerable strategic deterrence because right now the iranian case is that if the united states accuses us of terrorism, we will respond with terrorism against american forces in iran and elsewhere. that argument has been persuasive to a lot of people who essentially do not want to confront for fear of iranian terrorism. so more sausage or a sheriff political violence, terrorism has been remarkably effect it to the islamic republic. >> you can say a little bit the iranians are backing the who these again in. >> are involved in syria, yemen, iraq, certainly iraq. they are involved in bahrain, throughout the region. it

has been on the side of stability iran has been on the side of it. fighting terrorism and extremism for the past at least since two thousand and eleven two thousand and one we have a clear straight record of engaging in every attempt to counter terrorism in the region and unfortunately so the rabia and the united arab emirates have been on the wrong side the saudis and like minded countries in the region they've heard these positions from. iran retreated over and over again non the less they will say the islamic republic has not stopped trying to export the islamic revolution ever since the islamic revolution took place and therefore they say that that continues to destabilize all these places whether it's iraq whether it's iran whether it's lebanon on. what's the way out again let's look at the fact iran is not spending billions upon billions of dollars exporting them throughout the world it's saudi arabia look at every mask look at every incident of terrorism in the region and in the world who are behind these acts of terrorism they're all financed

in iran. the reason we can't support them in the hopes of regime change is because they have articulated no desire to overthrow the iranian regime. in fact, they want to work inside the political system. and any whiff of support from the united states would quickly evaporate their domestic support base. so they're not a viable candidate. we really don't have any viable candidates inside iran to try to support and overthrow the regime. so then there's direct military action. perhaps the most dramatic and drastic option. hopefully, the trump administration's not actively pursuing this approach at this moment, but the first problem here is that a strike against iran would be illegal, right? in both international and domestic law. i don't really -- i'm not, i try not to predict things about washington anymore, but i doubt that congress is prepared to provide trump with legal authorization the attack iran -- to attack iran. and, of course, in the context of international law, you need either the ju

, arms control agreement with iran we would fix iran. mr. smith: let me ask you this. secretary of state john kerry said on cnn or reported by cnn january 21 of 2016 that money from the deal, that the iranians were getting, would go to terrorists. to whom has that gone? who are the terrorists and how much? mr. sullivan: as i understand it the trump administration d.i.a. chief has said the bulk of that money has gone to domestic purposes not to the irgc. but of course the irgc and -- mr. shoot: do you know how much? mr. sullivan: no. it would behoover the committee to get a briefing from the dia chief who has laid out where he thinks the assessment is. mr. smith: we had numerous hearings and the chairman was stellar in ensuring we had multiple hearings on the iran deal before, during, and now after. even before the inspections -- the e the deal was signed, committee said that will he never permit inspections to inspect iran's nuclear bases. the identify rain minister of defense said, tehran will never allow any foreigners defense and miss

iran did iran did get you know as of factually in history that iran did get a lot of its beginning missile technology from north korea and but and has then go on ahead and proceed with their own development programs. but that that's aside from the new killers that aspects. i think that what's going to happen by the by point out of this agreement if it ultimately comes to that is to certify now but if you terminates us role then that's really going to show not only the europeans but even the north koreans if we intend to do anything with them short of going to nuclear war is that you cannot trust the united states to come to any and that this is going to have a debilitating effect on our ability to conduct foreign policy frankly ok i think we can actually listen to a sound bite of president trump talking about the violations he claims have been carried out this even to listen to that now. officials and military leaders have repeatedly claimed they will not allow inspectors on to military it's even though the international community suspects some of those sites were part of iran's thailand n

now, on iran the u.s. has got to respond to the full range of threats from iran, not just their nuclear program because we see in syria and in iraq, we see it right up along western syria now with the quds forces and the irgc. they're taking advantage of this fight against isis. and they're moving in, they're brutalizing syrians, but they've seized so much territory. and meanwhile, hezbollah, which is iran's terror proxy, is amassing fighters and troops along israel's border in the north, along the border in the east, and iran continues to acquire destabilizing conventional weapons but also intercontinental ballistic missiles. the administration has taken a realistic approach on iran, recognizing the full range of these threats. this is what we have been messaging in a bipartisan way on our committee. this is what brad sherman and i and mike mccaul and others, elliott engle have been talking about as we touch these policies. congress and the administration must work together to confront these threats while

i think it reveals iran, the pressure iran has come under. up to now they were living in heaven.he radicals controlling iran were getting money flowing in 50 billion they got and it's just upfront but down the line they get hundreds of billions of dollars with oil contracts with projects and other things and so all of a sudden this bonanza has stopped and now they're under pressure and i think that's important. look, i drew a red line in the u.n. against iranian enrichment and everybody said wow, is that going to cause a problem but in fact iran backed off and they never crossed that line because they know the power of crippling sanctions and other things that they would have to confront, so i would say right now, the ones who should be worried is iran not the u.s.. >> maria: the president also mentioned north korea you mentioned north korea at the beginning of our conversation. he said look, if you allow something to keep going on it will only get worse. it will only get worse and more dangerous as we've seen with north korea. do you believe iran is working with north korea on i

cross talking the iran deal i'm joined by my guess. in pittsburgh he is a partner at global growth advisors international strategic consultancy group based in new york and in london we cross that he's an iran expert at middle east are gentlemen cross-talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want i always appreciated in pittsburgh if i can go to you first here one of the things i'd like to focus on this program we know that i guess it's common knowledge now that donald trump is going to decertify this agreement. and looking at me in the mainstream media looking at all the cable stations it's remarkably low light on facts like for example the i.a.e.a. saying that iran is in compliance with this agreement but we hear about all this other stuff on the side so iran's behavior in the middle east and its other activities in the region but if i could remember correctly one of the reasons they wanted to focus just on the nucular side of things because it was doable this wasn't an agreement to solve all problems in the middle

to take unilateral action over the iran deal under the twenty fifteen deal iran agreed to limit its nuclear program in exchange for the easing of international sanctions against tehran. trumper stopped short of pulling out but made it clear that as president he can cancel the iran agreement at any time. let's cross to washington and bring in correspondent carson vaughn naaman he is in our d.c. studio we're also joined by our correspondent max hoffmann in brussels carson let's start with you trump has handed this back to congress what are their options now. well what trump once congress and the senate in particular to do is establish a sawed off trigger points which would prompt the united states to automatically impose sanctions if iran crosses certain red lines as for instance launching an intercontinental missile the point is that even terms advisers agree that iran is sticking to the letter of the agreement so trump is looking at the broader context and saying iran is the stabilizing the region and we cannot have this now the question is if congress really wants to do this and if they wa

news live from berlin donald trump reignite america's viewed with iran decertify the landmark agreement to curb its nuclear program but the us president stopped short of outright for peatling the deal instead of leaving its fate in the hands of congress. also coming up austria is expected to take a sharp swing to the right in this sunday's elections will take a look at how a hardline immigration stance has helped front runner sebastian kurtz snap up support. and female lawmakers in germany are cleaning out their desks after the september elections as the percentage of women in parliament drunks. waiter thank you for joining us u.s. president donald trump has said he will not recertify the two thousand and fifteen iran nuclear deal the multilateral agreement called for iran to shelve its disputed nuclear program and in exchange the international community would ease sanctions accused iran of violating the quote spirit of the agreement but stopped short of canceling the deal and said he's called on u.s. lawmakers and international partners to fix its flaws the agreement stipulates that th