director james woolsey on why he says it's worse than worthless. why one expert says fears of an economic meltdown in china are way overblown >>> as soon as this week congress is expected to vote on a resolution disapproving the nuclear agreement that president obama's administration as well as five other governments negotiated with iran. the deal with lift sanctions in iran in return for inspections in the controversial nuclear programme, and is meeting fierce oppositions from the republican side. from members of congress, to cheney. >> along with a pathway to a nuclear arsenal, several agreements would provide iran with funds and weapons the of terror. the dominance of the middle east, and the furtherance of tehran's efforts to threaten arab regimes and prevent the united states from defending allies and our interests in the persian gulf and behind >>> many will be valid. i'll discuss some later in the show. a number of president obama's democratic allies have come out against the iran nuclear deal on similar grounds. we'll discuss some concerns

insights of a former fbi agent >>> and ambassador james woolsey, former director of central intelligence, now the foundation of the chairman of democracies. >>> thanks for joining us. ambassador, let's start with you. 14 years after 9/11. is the u.s. safe from another attack? >> no. on some aspect of things we are a bit safer, i suppose, than we were before 9/11. safe - i would never claim that in any universal sense. >> what worries you? >> well, probably more than anything, the spread of nuclear weapons. i'm afraid what happens with the treaty in the senate agreement is being looked at by the congress now. within a very few years, it not already. iran will have a nuclear weapon, that means that the other nations in that part of the world will go nuclear very quickly. the next time you have an international crisis, perhaps caused by terrorism or something else involving three, four, five, seven nations in that part of the world, you can well have deli or four of them with -- three or four of them with nuclear weapons, that danger, as top. >> when we talk about threats, we talk about al

have got to hear what he has to say, along with the former director of the cia, ambassador james woolsey. >>> donald trump set to make a major foreign policy speech tonight. how will he verbally attack china over this very issue with the cyberspies? it will resonate with undecided voters? we are all over the markets, all over the story of our nation's security and less than an hour to the closing bell. so let's start the "countdown." >> we begin with breaking news. yes, we have a major rally on our hands, but it is the addiction to the internet that is going to cause problems when it comes to being vulnerable to major cyberattacks from hackers that are sponsored by so-called nation states. call it what it is, china and to a lesser extent russia. nefarious characters zeroing in on the personal data of corporations and government employees all for the purpose of blackmail. remember when in 2013, the store chain target was hacked. we had an estimated breach of 40 million customers' credit and debit card information was exposed. earlier this year, the office of personnel management is where

director james woolsey on why he says it's worse than worthless. why one expert says fears of an economic meltdown in china are way overblown >>> as soon as this week congress is expected to vote on a resolution disapproving the nuclear agreement that president obama's administration as well as

director james woolsey on why he says it's worse than worthless. one expert says fears of an economic meltdown in china are way overblown >>> as soon as this week congress is expected to vote on a resolution disapproving the nuclear agreement that president obama's administration as well

neil: ambassador woolsey, thank you very, very much. we appreciate it.are learning as the ambassador and i were speaking donald trump is set to confirm 90 minutes from now he will stay with the republican party. he will not bolt and become a third party candidate if he shoed louis the nomination or opt out of the republican primary process all together. some are interpreting that as a sign he is growingly confident he will get the nomination. others saying he is using some smart calculus here in states like south carolina it is crucial, if you're off the ballot there if you don't do something like this, after this. is it our insightful strategies that make edward jones one of the country's biggest financial services firms? or 13,000 financial advisors who say thank you? it's why edward jones is the big company that doesn't act that way. is it keeps the food out. for me before those little pieces would get in between my dentures and my gum and it was uncomfortable. just a few dabs is clinically proven to seal out more food particles. super poligrip is par

director james woolsey on this programme was clear that he hates the deal. what is your considered opinion of the deal forged and tested under the hot lights of public debates? >> i love that phrasing. i don't want to be shy. i spent and my focus of professional life is how to stop countries that start down the path of nuclear weapons, how do you stop them and reverse course. when i testified against the foreign relations committee i said use two standards of assessment. how does it compare to other agreements - is it better or worse. in general it's been effective. second, how does it compare to the alternatives. the agreement comes out very good. it has unprecedented features, it's the most intrusive set of verification rules negotiated in a nonproliferation agreement. >> so now that democrats, right, and the senate rallied around the agreement, i want to be fair. what are the next hurdles. this is the question i should arriving, what are the next -- ask, what are the next hurdles to say the deal faced before congress. what i really want to say to you is i

. >>> ambassador james woolsey served as the ambassador to the u.n, i spoke to the ambassador earlier and i asked him why he believes the agreement makes no sense. >> it's worse than making no sense. it makes bad sense. it is worse than worthless. >> worse than worthless? >> worse than worthless. first of all it gives a path that is easily cheated on, for iran to get to nuclear weapons capability in relatively short order. the idea that iran would have a secret deal with the international inspectors, that can't be disclosed to the american congress, even, much less the american people -- >> you're talking about the side agreements? >> yeah, yeah, is absolutely ridiculous. >> my understanding is part of what's going on in the side deals is information that is pertinent to iran's sovereignty, that it would not want made available to -- >> well i'm sure iran doesn't want anything made available. they are full of themselves. as being -- having the right to dominate the middle east through terrorists, through people like the houthi in yemen or through their own forces. i think that to have

joining us is senator james woolsey former cia director. great to have you here today. >> good to be here, uma. >> with the latest revelations what impact do you think this has had while she was at the helm of the state department? >> clearly there were some violations and important ones here. it's one thing for there to be a conversation and if you're not sure exactly who was on either end, and a communication that you see and it's not stamped, you can understand how someone would have gotten confused about whether it was classified or not. but some of this material was reportedly reconnaissance, satellite photographs, those types of things are stamped with more code words than you can imagine. and to have some of those going through the system and not know whether it's classified or not is -- is quite a stretch. this all reminds me the bon mot what's the difference between an e-mail and a diamond, the answer is an e-mail is forever. >> all right, ambassador. critics are dismissing when it could lead to an indictment on classified informat

make sure i get this correct, he is the chairman of the foundation for defense of democracy, jim woolseynor to be with you today. disagreement that is being discussed is not an ordinary agreement. it's not an agreement where the two parties actually negotiate. there is quid pro quo deals here there, no. we are the subjects of an attempt to get us to submit. iran is totally about the business of requiring submission. they do it with the dominance. they do it with money. they do it with terrorism and that they are in the process of moving to be able to do it with nuclear weapons. we have to stop this. as iran moves into having nuclear weapons and it will, i believe, within and a very short. of time it will be able to intimidate its neighbors. we will have an arms race in the middle east. in which we have four, five, six, seven countries next time around who all have nuclear weapons and the possibility of terrible destruction is imminent there in the circumstances. we have a situation in which controls nearly 150 billion dollars provided to him by the action of our government. you know, 150