violations fueled by the jcpoa. there would still be in iran deal in place if the regime hadn't continued and accelerated it's illegal ballistic missile program, a violation of existing u.s. security council resolutions. there would still be in iran deal in place if the regime didn't use commercial aircraft to deploy islamic revolutionary guards force advisors in syria, another violation of the existing un council resolutions. there would still be in iran deal in place today if the regime stopped providing funds and aid to hamas and his -- violation. there would be in iran dealing place today if the regime had not empowered and -- and created new ones that threaten americans in iraq and syria. the regimes activities are the reason the jcpoa is no longer in place. the regime's actions continuously demonstrated a willingness to cheat out in the open on existing un security council resolutions, while defenders of the regime and defenders of the iran deal said they were complying in the shadows with the jcpoa. we would

the jcpoa, everything is done within the parameters. but one important element is not all companies are the same level. we know there are some multinational companies. in fact, particularly exposed to the u.s. market and u.s. financial system. but not all the european or asian or whatever companies are very concerned about policies. this has been an experienced we had before the jcpoa under the international sanctions and u.s. sanctions, but even at that time they're willing to work with a number of european companies, a number of asian companies and a number of important companies. so the door would not be closed for working with iran. we know there are some companies who have particular interest in the u.s. market, they would be more conflicted. but there are other possibilities. >> to broaden it out, you know because it's been said by everybody, the u.s., that obviously they want a new deal. they want an add-on deal. they want it to include your activities in syria, in yemen, they want to include missiles, all the stuff that they don

thisment i sometimes as the jcpoa or joint comprehensive plan of action. this is an agreement that was reache by the obama administration. it was voted on after the fact by andctlly a majority of members of the house and senate chose to the agreement, but not enough to be able to stop it. so it went into effect and it has gotten some plays a the president has pulled out the united s involvement in that agreement. what i'm going to talk about this ening is new information that has come from the permanent subcommittee on investigations, which i chair. we began an investigation into one aspect of this agreement nearly two years ago, and it was based on information we received that despite the obama administration's claims to the contrary, there may have been some undisclosed arrangement with iran to grant them access to the u.s. financial system. the deal went like this, in exchange toran ain to certain limitatio regarding its nuclear arsenal,ncding enrisching uranium, the united nations security counsel would -- council lift some sanctionon iran. as part of

, but jcpoa plus essentially. two accounts for the weapons program. points they have reached. number one. number two, i would say that i also certainly believe that any agreement with north korea has to include a very robust verification regime. a verification regime that was in the jcpoa was the most robust we have ever seen in a nuclear agreement. and it is the kind of thing that would have been and should be, essentially, if you click -- if you include the weapons component, what we should have fired to for north korea. i also recall very clearly that the main precipitating factor that b theht end of the last major round of negotiations with the north koreans in in the 2009 timeframe was inability to reach agreement on verification regime. i can tell you that what was on the table at that point comes nowhere close to what was in the jcpoa. that g, whatlose are the steps? i don't know. -- if isee any other were advising, and i certainly believe there are experts who are trying to advise the trump administration'

whatever happens to the jcpoa. i think the iranians understand that.t would be wholly separate from whether they spin a couple of centrifuges. if they move towards a weapons program, this is something the entire world would find unacceptable. and we would end up in a path that is not in the best interest of iran. >> when you say the wrath of the entire world, i'm talking about the entante. jordan, iraq, saudi arabia, united arab emirates. would they support that wrath in the form of american military action. >> don't confuse that for military action. the moral and economic power that fell upon them. that's what i'm speaking to. i'm not talking to military action here. i truly hope that's never the case. it's not in anyone's best interest for that. president trump has been very clear. iran will not get a nuclear weapon nor start its weapons program on this president's watch. and i have heard some say that we've separated from our allies on this issue of iran. i don't think that's the case. when i talked to my arab friends, israelis, all of those in the

since trump walked away from the jcpoa, he felt it wasn't adequate enough and to some degree i didn'tagree with him. i didn't think it was appropriate to walk away from it, however. since verification is one of a key ingredient, one of the most important ingredients of any negotiated agreement, what will trump say early press conference about how this is better than the jcpoa, or will he simply do what he wants to do, lie about it. >> that's a very pointed question. thank you. so i have two questions kind of a process question and then a verification and u.s. credibility question is kind of what i interpret it. do any of you want to take those up? laura? [ laughing ] >> i was kind of combined on a few, if you don't mind. i would start by saying, number one, i certainly can't speak -- i can't speak for the administration and i decided long ago that deciding to try to predict what the president will do, so i will not engage in that either. what i will tell you is, number one, of course, iran's nuclear program was not anywhere close to the point of where north korea is today. so that sor

then the jcpoa was signed two years after that. a seven year stretch. presidency? >> and what happens if there's no real movement on denuclearization. at what point does john bolton, i would love to know what john bolton thinks about everything. this is a man who was proponent of military action against not only north korea but iran. at what point do people like john bolton lose patience. >> will you ask the same from north korea that you asked for iran in cutting off the jcpoa? >> and if president trump takes everything that president obama did and slowlyearing it apart in the oval office, what does that say for this agreement and future presidents. >> we heardothing about icbms. >> nothing. >> four point statement did not address, i went through the document, read it again. i looked for key words. no mention of verification, monitors, observers, no mention of ballistic missiles, weapons programs. the word denuclearn was only in the context of the entire korean peninsula, not specific to north korea. lot of experts raised questions as to whether or not

you and i have talked a lot about the jcpoa. i believe that agreement took seven years to come into place if i am correct and it's very detail detailed. >> almost 17 pages at some point, the jcpoa. >> and very convoluted, something you can't read. and this is the exact opposite. >> it doesn't seem like a comprehensive agreement. i think this is the beginning of the process. this is a declaration of intention to work towards these goals. so for people who have followed this for many years, they will say we are well beyond this point, we have talked about this first with the six-party talks that we've been trying to do this, the north koreans have agreed to previous similar agreements and they have failed. so what is different about this. >> it feels like a weak memorandum of understanding and it reflects a state departments that that has been largely gutted. when you have these summits, what normally happens is you have working groups from the state department and on both sides hashing out the details and the leaders come for the

we didn't even ask the iranians to sign the jcpoa, but more than presenting a signature, present it towould 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 h

jcpoa is one of them. our concerns about iranian maligned behavior, their missile program and so forth, we're in constant discussion with our nato allies and germany in particular on these issues. so the tweets you referred to by the president, the new ambassador, rick ranell, a terrific ambassador, by the way, i spoke to him on friday. we're all committed to improving our relationship with germany. when you hear the president talk about trade issues, for example, he's committed to a fair and reciprocal trading relationship with the eu that is one part of the larger architecture of our transatlantic relationship. >> i want to ask you one final question because even though you yourself have not had a huge amount of previous diplomatic experience, you have sought out, you know, advice and information from a bipartisan group of former officials. and your own family comes from a distinguished diplomatic families. one of your uncles was the last ambassador in iran. so i just want to ask you about your view of,

i think even the administration's criticism of not the jcpoa, but the previous korean agreements, that this one has to be judged against the jcpoa, the eight previous north korean agreements, the 11 resolutions in the u.n. as well as verification equal to a greater one than what we had, etc. it is a high bar the administration has set for itself, even as it is now trying to lower expect nations. ms. demick: since we have admitted this is a group of north korean experts, and not trump experts -- unfortunately, i might be at the wrong panel -- if we couldalk a little bit about kim jong-un-un. we will start with dr. pak. to what extent are they the same north koreans, or do you see the difference is with kim jong-un? he has certainly done a couple of boulder things with marketization in the economy. he seems a more enterprising character than his father. but it is the same old north koreans. ms. pak: there are differences between how kim jong-un handles things versus his father and grandfather. he is probably more like his grandfather in a gregarious way, works in transparent ways in the

. >> disappointed with the american decision to step away from the jcpoa on iran. >> reporter: becausethe differences, french president emmanuel macron said it's possible the other six countries sign an agreement at the end of the summit without the u.s. the white house said yesterday that president trump will be leaving the summit early, skipping the portion on climate change and the environment. an aide will take his place. so while tension is growing among the u.s. and its allies, it's easing with china. and that's because yesterday the white house agreed to lift a ban on access to u.s. companies for a chinese technology company called zte. but the two nations are still embroiled in the broader conflict over tariffs and trying to avoid a trade war. hena? >> laura podesta, thank you. >>> president trump will head directly from canada to ngape w to meet with kim jong-un on tuesday. yesterday in washington, the president said he's ready to walk away if the meeting doesn't go his way. and that if kim doesn't denuke sanctions will remain in place. but mr. trump said he's ready for the hi

so the jcpoa is not quite a treaty, which means it can be undone without congressional sanction. but having made this move and gone in, a fact has been created you are now in a new situation. if you undo it, can you go back to status quo? or will you be in a new situation different from where you were before? and i don't think it's easy to go back to status quo because the sanctions, the u.n. impo sagss, the consensus which are split up internationally is not there anymore. >> what you're saying is president trump, who wants to put more pressure on iran by pulling the u.s. out will find he won't be able to? >> he may be able to, if you read what his officials say, they say we are powerful, we're the united states we'll do it to banks that do business in america and companies that do business in america and they all have to pay attention. you might be able to have considerable influence on this issue. but on many issues the u.s. is going alone, that's a different world the u.s. will be facing. you're very powerful but i think your influence would be less than if you went in togeth

, but also all previous korean agreements that, you know, this one has to be judged against the jcpoa, the eight previous north korean agreements, the resolutions, by the u.n., as well as verification equal to or greater than cfe and it's hi the administration set for itself, even if now it's trig to lower expectations. >> since we've admitted that this is a group of military experts and not trump experts, unfortunately, maybe i'm at the wrong panel, if you would talk little about kim jong-un, one of the names i'm going to start with dr. pak, we discussed this before. north korean experts send to say that north koreans do this, north koreans do that. to what extent are the same, north koreans or difference with kim jong-un, he's certainly done a couple of boulderer things with marketization and the economy, he seems maybe more enterprising than his father, but the same old koreans. >> there are differences now kim jong-un handled things from his father and grandfather. he's more like his gndfather in the gregarious way and transparent way h deals with the publ for instance, in 2012 th

we believe the jcpoa is a good agreement. it is not perfect. on purpose, we have treated the nuclear issue as separate from the other, because it is such a complicated issue. we did it without naive assumptions about the behavior of iran. we are expecting the situation in iran to worsen because we think the regime will be obliged to show up the americans, so we were not surprised. a policy of balancing against iran in the middle east. so we discussed the question of ballistic missiles and what would happen at the end of the agreement in terms of the activity of a ron -- a ran -- iran. so we are trying our best to preserve the agreement but it is difficult. as you said, the american sanctions are more or less leading most of the european companies to leave the iranian market. that means for the iranian regime, it becomes complicated .nd difficult to assess it was about monitoring and limiting the program in exchange to have the reoning of normal .rade relations with iran if their radians are not getting ans are notrani getting anything o the fro

supposed to be more of a reformist, and the other ones are the hardliners and radicals, who don't want jcpoasucceed, don't wa nt don't wantjcpoa to succeed, don't want people like us to be good citizens of the world and be friends with the rest of the world. so i think that is what they are concerned with when they see environmental activism. and this is what is actually creating a lot of problems for the people of iran. so they have the same voice as trump and others, and they don't want the current system to function well, because they are threatened by, as i said, breaking down the walls, and any sort of diplomatic success. and thatis any sort of diplomatic success. and that is sad, because at the end of the day, who loses are the people of iran. and that breaks my heart, that, like, you know, the people of iran are the ones who have got caught in the middle of this battle between the world's powers. all right, then what is the most helpful thing to do, given what is happening in iran today? i mean, goldtron, you referred to thejcpoa, with the acronym for the nuclear deal which trump has

pulling out of the jcpoa. had apparen guaranteed iran would be able to sell its oil.ran'ss according to semiofficial news agency. one claim from the iranians and europeans and now, another from the u.s. pushing allies to cut imports to zero by november. this is bloomberg. ♪ mark: from bloomberg headquarters in london, i am mark barton, checking out the tuesday close. oil and gas lead in the advance, sending the stoxx 600 higher for the third day. trade concerns easing a little bit. gold, whichboosting continues its decline. continuing that bearish trajectory, we had the 50 day moving average fall below the 200 day average. global stocks dropped yesterday amid trade concerns. appears that gold is being treated currently as part of the commodity complex as opposed to a haven asked -- has set -- asset. goals are assigned the relative below 30.ndex is it has dropped 7% since closing 24,1358 an ounce on january the 17 month high. gold is not a haven at present. a simple chart showing you the turkish lira against the dollar. the lira is rising against the dollar. a bit chop

. >> what is interesting is he keeps raising the bar on himself by talking about the jcpoa as a bad deal and willing to walk away from a deal with north korea if it isn a good deal. talking itn negative terms that was a comprehensive deal he is raising the bar on himself ahead of the summit. >> this is the way he did real estate negotiations. told people you have to be willing to walk away. there were meetings in which he would throw a grenade and walk out. if he feelsght in anyway, shape or form which is why meetings are full of flattery for donald trump, he would leave. i ink kim jong-un is very well aware of that. sent him that nice great, and so i think that if people understand how to deal with donald trump now. world leaders, they are kind of used to him. >> except, that kim jong-un i the same way supposedly. they need to be flattered and they will walk away insulted. so we have a situation where we have two leaders and unfortunately one is very dangerous. what happens when you have two characteristics in the same room that will react the same way. we never had that. >> earlier he

is -- the united states has chosen to reimpose sanctions on iran and therefore, to pull out of the jcpoa. we have worked with france and germany, because we continue to believe that it is important, as long as iran meets its obligations under that deal, we believe it continues to be important to maintain that nuclear deal. but we accept and we have been working with each of those countries and the united states, and others, that there was more that needs to be done in relation to iran's nuclear activity in the region. program, and distant the activity in the region. we will continue to work with all partners who want us to take want like us, to ensure that we take action to reduce destabilizing activity. >> the international rules-based order of which the prime minister speaks is under attack from the rise of nationalism in this part of the world. what does she think about its strength, when the president of the united states can call for the readmission of russia into the g eight, just weeks after russia has used nerve agents to try to kill people in the streets of the united kingdom? [

we do believe the jcpoa is a good agreement. it's not perfect of course. we on purpose, i think you remember, on purpose we have treated the nuclear issue in isolation from other because it was such a complicated issue. such a political issue. we didn't want to exchange. it didn't make any sense. so was in isolation and we did it without any naÏve assumption about the behavior of iran. we are expecting it to worsen because we do believe the iranian regime would be obliged to show that it was caving to the americans. so we were absolutely not surprised and we have been advocating with the previous administration, with this administration policy of balancing, balancing against iran in the middle east. so that was our policy so that's reason why we discussed it with this administration, the question of ballistic missiles, the question what would happen at the end of the agreement, also in terms of the activities of iran. so we do regret that this administration has decided get out of the grievant. we are trying our best to preserve the agreement, but it's dif

is the united states has chosen to reime pose sanctions on iran and therefore, to pull out of the jcpoa the nuclear arm nuclear deal. we've worked with france and germany because we continue to believe as long as iran continues to meet that deal it's important to maintain that nuclear deal, but we accept and have b working with those countries and with the united states, and others, that there is more that need to be done in relation to iran's ballistic missile program and destabilizing activity in the region and we will continue to work with all partners who want, like us to ensure that we can take some action to reduce at that destabilizing activity. >> the international order under attack from nationalism in various parts of the world. what does she think about its strength when the president of the unid states can call for the weird mission of russia to the g8 weeks after russia has used nerve agents to try to kill people on the streets of the-- >> and even if we do not have the united states as a partner in this endeavor will she commit the u.k. government to working as closely as

. >> iran starts enriching come of you have violated the jcpoa in europe should gf iran will be violating the deal. >> supreme leader ayatollah khamenei made the announcement which he or order the increase in enrichment capacity. >> t iranian nation and government will not standby suffering from sanctions nuclear limitations. speak with initial increases are modest. iran claims it would still be within the limits set by the 2015 agreement. iran is allowed to emerge up to 3.67%. 90% is needed for a bomb. the decision to restart appears to more of a warning to the remaining signatories of the nuclear deal, consequences if it were to collapse. israeli primminister benjamin netanyahu is currently on a tour meeting with european leaders, and when asked what he wanted to discuss, he replied only iran, iraq, iran. >> the greatest or to the world today my view is nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical islamic regime like iran. >> although european powers to back the deal, they have concerns over iran's segmental program and its influence across the middle east. iran says the two issues are not

say to my honorable statesit is the united who have chosen to impose sanctions and to pullout of the jcpoa have worked with germany because we continue to believe it is important as long as iran meet its obligations under the field, it continues to be important to maintain that nuclear deal. working with those countries and the united states and others that there is more that needs to be done in relation to advancement in the and destabilizing activity in the region. we will continue to work with us to takes who want action to reduce the destabilizing activity. [indiscernible] under attack from the rise of nationalism, what do she think about its strength when the president of the united states calls for the remission of russia to g8 weeks after russia has used nerve agents to try to kill people on the streets of the united kingdom. even if we do not pass the united states as a partner, which you commit the u.k. government to working as closely as possible with other like-minded allies to uphold this? ms. may: i say to the right honorable gentleman i have responded earlier in relation to t

dumping the jcpoa and allowing our allies to kind of go it alone. that's great with putin. he's propping up iran. you want to give putin, syria, he'll do that too. he'll sign that away. so everything that he is doing really does enure to russia's benefit in the middle east. it's extraordinary. >> ned, give us the larger picture. what does it mean if we don't have these strong relationships any longer? what does it mean if our allies don't look to us as a great friend or somebody they can rely on? what does that mean for our future. >> i think what donald trump doesn't appear to understand in any of this is not just that this is the rules based international order that we built, but this is the rules based international order that we actually wrote. it works in our favor. that works in the favor of liberal democracies around the globe. it allows for free trade, it allows for partnership across the board. this is what the american -- this is what our american system of international relations has been predicated upon since the end of world war ii what vladimir putin wants to

tomorrow, iaea, about reprocessing within the confines of the jcpoa. apparently they had some room.'t bee m noteally a change. definitely not a strategic threat or even a military threat to the united states. it is not welcome but something we're definitely not concerned about militarily. melissa: interesting. lieutenant colonel, thanks for joining us. >> my pleasure. thanks for having me. melissa: meanwhile, i don't know if you saw this yesterday. this is one of the most startling story to me. israel using a meme from the hit movie, mean girls, to respond to a threatening tweet iran's top leader this is what iran said. our stance against israel is the same stance we have always taken. israel is a malignant cancerous tumor in the west asian region that has to be removed and eradicated. it is possible and it will happen. so they, you know, send off this fire. the embassy of israel, at first thought they had been hacked respond with the meme, from ""mean girls"," she says w are you so obsessed with me? for hours, they had to have been being had. can't be real. they haven't denied it w

>> shannon: a former obama administration official saying "the specific license was if a phoned of jcpoaents to give iran access to pools of money held overseas. it was aimed solely to allow the movement of iran's own funds stranded at an omani bank. "byron, they did get european banks to agree to this. >> it is the deception of it as well. once they got to it. here this was not something, as jonah said, they could've gone through the u.s. senate. no way that they could do that. it's not a surprise at all that the next president could completely undo something like this. again, have the ability to say they didn't tell you the truth about this deal. it's a bad deal. they lied to you about it. now we are finding out what they agreed to. >> shannon: let's talk about the other big foreign policy issue. they are prepping for that singapore sung summit. >> our goal in the summit must be the complete and verifiable irreversible denuclearization of the korean peninsula. we hope it results in peace on the peninsula. the singapore summit, all eyes in the world are on it. >> my principal concern is

we work with iran on that -- with the jcpoa and with other countries and we know how to do verification. there is not a structure in place to do that with north korea but it is a major part of the negotiation that they do that and then the ability to verify that on the ground. >> they clearly have a long way to go and this process only just beginning. president trump also said the united states in his words could save a fortune by suspending the joint military exercises with south korea or what he calls war games. are those joint exercises necessary for maintaining readiness or is it possible t main main a military -- to maintain a military presence without them. and in other words, do you support what the president announced. >> i would support a delay of the next military exercises where we work with the south koreans and find cooperation and we do two major exercises a year and we've already had the first one and that already happened and another one scheduled for later in year. they are smaller exercises that also happen fairly consistently throughout the year. even between the two

. >> there is an existing framework called the jcpoa to control the nuclear activity of iran. not abandon it without having something substantial and more substantial instead. both in the united states and in europe, we are living in a time of anger and fear. but these feelings do not build anything. by polluting the oceans, not mitigating co2 emissions, and destroying our biodiversity, we are killing our planet. let us face it. there is no planet b. >> seth: yeah. we know. if there was we'd all be there right now. [ laughter and applause ] this has been "a closer look." ♪ >> seth: we'll be right back with jimmy fallon, everybody! stick around! [ cheers and applause ] ♪ >> announcer: for more of seth's "closer looks," be sure to subscribe to "late night" on youtube. every day, you're thankful for the ones you love. and every day you promise to protect them. off! is here to help with proven protection against mosquitoes. trust our family to protect yours. sc johnson, a family company ♪ ♪ you are many different things in one amazing package, and t.j.maxx gives you the freedom to

there is one important observation i want to share with you and that is, trump just abandoned, um, the jcpoa, right? our deal with iran. and we have to wonder, given this abandonment, why is kim jong-un still pursuing this summit meeting? and to me, you know, the big key issue here is, what kind of incentive is kim jong-un going to provide at the summit for trump and still we have no idea what those demands will be. >> yeah. summit still two weeks away. we'll see what happens. professor lee, thank you for your insight. >> thank you, professor. >> thank you for having me. >>> now to some new information in the case of the alleged golden state killer. a judge in sacramento just unsealed redacted search warrants in the case. we are learning that back in april, investigators used dna from a car door handle to identify 72-year-old joseph deangelo as the likely suspect in several homicides. after that dna came up to a match to crime scenes in ventura and orange county, investigators retrieved more dna samples from the trash at deangelo's home in citrus heights including a piece of tissue. the judg

they saw both the monetary and military terms how jcpoa created an opening for iran to be more aggressive. our focus is working with all of our allies to build a comprehensive international framework. what i have seen an hour interactions in talking about iran both pre-and post- decision, there is a fair and why consensus on analysis of the iranian threat. our european -- wanted to deal effectively with the missiles, bringing revolutionary guard to syria. president macron had a four-point formula that are very similar to the u.s. approach. >> i understand that. you're talking about nonnuclear actity. we can continue to work with europeans on nonnuclear activity, but let's get the plainfield straight. europeans are not interested in re- imposing new nuclear sanctions on iran. they are interested in trying to hold together the set of economic benefits that will entice iran to stay in the nuclear agreement. that is europe's position. >> i think we'll know more in coming days. there is some difference of opinion among members of the e3. we will know more about their collective perspective whe

another thing was the announcement of jcpoa, the iran deal when president trump capuld the u.s. out of it, as well. it wasn't that secretary mattis was surprised. there was speculation he was going to pull the u.s. out and the president made the decision without informing secretary mattis of it and administration officials both current and former who we spoke with said that, in fact, secretary mattis had to call the white house and say -- has the decision been made to find out in advance of the public announcement of it. >> to be clear, even though the pentagon is saying this is silliness, are they pushing back and saying, oh, that didn't happen? the secretary absolutely knew this -- the president was going to make this announcement and they had a conversation about it? >> so one of the other examples where -- was that -- was the exercises, when president trump after the historic singapore summit announced that the u.s. and south korea would be canceling their upcoming military exercises and called at the time provocative war games, dana white, the pentagon spokesperson he menti

we tend to think about let's say iran politics, jcpoa. there are these issues that come below the high level and it's like that's nice. how do we do that? and they're aware of getting much more polarized and it's not necessarily politically polarized, but it depends on the issue, but it's polarized from 2016, urban suburban, education levels. one of the views about foreign policy have to do with education levels. it's about obvious demographics like veteran, nonveteran, your religious background, et cetera, et cetera, your ethnic background, women, men, tons of ways in which we're divided, but i think what we have lost is the ability, of course, to come back and realize that fundamental truth of the things that unite us. it is my nature to frame these things in a hopeful way and i hope not to be polly annaish about it. -- pollyannaish about it. i'm finishing up a study now looking at congress and how internationalist is congress. it uses completely different sets of data. that's actually quite promising, that you find areas and how about

from the jcpoa. my amendment though is simple. we just should not use tax dollars to subsidize iran's nuclear activity thruts purchase of heavy water. i don't think the president would want to do that. but i think it's important that we continue with this in law which we've had now for over a year. i think it will ensure the misthivings past are not repeated and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? ms. kaptur: i rise to claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. kaptur: thank you very much. i rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, though i think he intends it well. i want to inform him that the department of energy has said it does not have plans to purchase additional heavy water from iran. so i think this amendment is really irrelevant. i don't know, frankly, i would rather that the united states take whatever iran has rather than letting them sell toyota russia or somebody els