joining me now is the president of j street, jeremy ben ammi and attorney alan dershowitz who's beenh netanyahu for more than 30 years, will be meeting with him this week and will attend the speech this week. jeremy the ad says he's using it as a prop for his campaign at home but response from prime minister netanyahu is to say, wait a minute congress has an important role to play in this issue and i'm coming to influence the congress. what's wrong with that? >> i think one of the things he could have done is delayed the speech until after his election. that's what was called for in the last few weeks. if the interest at stake is a serious discussion of iran policy, there are ways to do that in a closed-door setting, ways to do it through back channels after the election. this kind of appearance has been used in the past by the prime minister as a campaign ad and that's where you inject the partisan agenda that defeats your policy agenda in the long run. >> professor, why not delay the speech far month? >> because the deal might very well have been struck by then. we're told by john

i do want to ask the question though of jeremy professor dershowitz' point should democrats because they are the ones in opposition to this stay away from the speech or do you agree with the professor, jeremy everyone should attend? >> it's an individual decision for members of congress to make. that's not the issue. the issue is whether or not this speech has set back israel's national interest. has this speech done damage the way it was concocted to the u.s./israel relationship. that's what the former director said in intensely detailed interview saying that nobody's done more damage to the u.s. israel strategic relationship than prime minister netanyahu. with the white house and that's the problem with this speech. >> professor, when susan rice ambassador rice is using words like destructive to discuss the u.s./israeli relationship would you concede significant damage has been done or do you believe it's repairable? >> i think it's repairable. and i think we won't know until we hear the speech. the speech is going to be critical. if it persuades members of congress to serve their cons

. >> you can read dershowitz book on this best book dershowitz wrote. first four chapters. what we did for 30 years is encourage them to come and kill us. and we would do nothing about it. we created the atmosphere. we reinforced the people that did the munich olympics released by the german government. the people did the -- released by the italian government. the european governments were cowardly. they were afraid they were going to be attacked by terrorists. and we created this movement. this movement was alive, well and gigantic when it declared war on us and hit us on september 11th when president bush struck back that is the first time we drove them back. >> and that was the 9/11 commission report's conclusion. they had been at war with us. now we have administration they won't even use the term radical -- >> it is a tragedy and it is extremely dangerous. for two reasons. for military reasons which have been explained by general keane and so many others many, many times. this ideological reasons it's even more dangerous. if reagan will fight the battle of ideas to the

alan dershowitz under oath called what you said lies, and you "tabloid -- the last time i believed airer -- >> the flight log has bill clinton on the plane. >> alan dershowitz -- let me repeat under oath has sworn -- >> about him. >> no. about bill clinton being on the island was a lie. and all you're doing is repeating a national inquirer type of journalism with no facts. and all tabloid which is what i don't do. you like, but i don't do that. >> so two things have come up. one is the flight logs that have shown he's on the plane with epstein on a number of occasions. number two, he was noticed and identified on that island. so if it turns out -- first of all, why is he hanging out with the guy number one. and number two why is he going to that island that is called "orgy island". >> you've mixed the tabloid innuendo nonsense lies with the fact he might have gone to an island with someone who has been convicted of some terrible things. >> he's hanging out with a convicted pedophile. >> not that you would ever do this guilt by association -- >> oh, no. would you hang out with a convi

that is alan dershowitz with the hair. archibald cox became a solicitor general -- i think this was after the solicitor general of the united states and resigned during -- >> there are a couple of other asian -- other asian men. >> they were visiting professors from japan. now, you will notice the paucity of women at that time. it's in my lifetime. and probably the lifetimes of most of us here. there were no women tenured professors at the harvard law school. the other women in the photos were administrative people. such as myself or lecturers. and there were no asian americans. and there was one tenured african-american professor in the rear. >> all right. so what prompted you to run? asian-american woman, what prompted this? >> here i am campaigning. >> yeah. >> and this is when peter and i won the -- won the primary election. ok. i had a career in law school administration. i was teaching. but i also was in practice. i came back to new york as i said. i was a child of the 1960's. so i was very involved in doing what i t

and alan dershowitz emeritus professor of law at harvard law school. author of "terror tunnels: the case for israel's just war against hamas." great to see both of you this morning. hilary do you agree with susan rice's assessment that benjamin netenyahu's visit will be destructive to the relationship between u.s. and israel? >> i think the u.s./israel relations are at an historic low. but i would say it's going to be a clarifying moment. an important moment. it may not be quite as destructive as the rhetoric out there pretends it to be. i think it will be important to clarify that prime minister netenyahu has a position that is essentially fact-free. what u.s. officials have said on background to the "washington post" is that it's fictional. he's living in fantasyland. >> you don't believe iran is as close to getting nuclear weapons as he will say they are. >> well it's not me. you have the almost the entire israeli national security establishment, 200 israeli generals came out this week to say that netenyahu's claims are not accurate. you have the wh

hilary ceo strategic middle east analyst and alan dershowitz. thank you both for this.roposition that if the u.s. wants to make a deal it should be a good thing. you represent that hillary, why as a citizen should i be happy about this deal? >> well iran is a rising power. the islamic republic of iran is a rising power just as china was in the early 1970s and as presidents nixon and kissinger needed to normalize with china, we need to normalize with iran. we need to allow us to get off of this really strategically self-damaging pursuit of dominance in the region and instead pursue a balance of power approach that recognizes all of the important powers in the region and has a constructive relationship with them. iran under any political order is critically important of the it's a huge hydro carbon power. a sophisticated educated population. it's not going away. >> we get that point so what is the counter, the basic theory there is that iran is now like china was, do you agree, professor? >> absolutely not. china is a rational calculating, secular government. iran is a su