you david quickly. it seems like they're saying when it comes to a matter that doesn't directly affect an imminent assault or attack in the united states you need congressional approval for something that involves an international norm like chemical weapons use. it seems to me that sets up the premise for six months or a year if now we have to make a decision about what to do with if the mullahs decide to weaponize their nuclear program over in tehran. doesn't that set up a predicate now where he has to go to congress? >> i think that's a very good point. he says i reserve the authority to do this without congress. i don't need to go to congress. but i'm going to anyway. and it's hard to say why a future scenario like the one you outlined would be different. that somehow he didn't have to go to congress in the other scenario. he has set a precedent that's going to be hard to explain if -- >> here's where i disagree. couldn't he make the argument if all of a sudden we faced a threat from iran that america faces an imminent threat at any point because iran's nuclear arsenal would be capable of hitting us or could pose an existential threat to israel --