iran has proven time and again that it cannot be trusted. that s why the first major concession is a source of concern. it leaves iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and relies on inspectors to prevent a break out. it creates a real danger that iran could get to the bomb by violating the deal. the second major concession creates an even greater danger, that sigh ran could get to the bomb by keeping the deal. because virtually all the restrictions on iran s nuclear program will exprior in about a decade. now a decade may seem like a longtime in political life but it is a blink of an eye in the eye of a nation. it is a blink of an eye in the life of our children. we all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when iran s nuclear
proposed agreement. what did you make of barack obama s statement yesterday, downplaying the chances of succeeding of getting this deal? he said it s more likely than not now that iran will walk away from the deal. well i think my sense about that is first of all, it s probably true. and secondly, i think he s also trying to make it look like he s not offering them a big fat sweet lollipop of a deal. in other words, that he s being tough enough that iran might not buy this. i expect that s what s at play here. that would be my i m going to ask this question of marco rubio later but i want to ask you now. why despite the objections we heard today, very articulately eloquently laid out by the israeli prime minister is president obama so dead-set on getting this deal which is so controversial that so many things will not stop iran, will not stop it? well, i thought for some time, megyn, and i think his
negotiations but also says he would only sign a deal into law that is good for the iranians. all right. we ve lost his satellite feed obviously. that was frederick pleitgen in tehran. he was noting that there are domestic and political considerations too, where there are people inside iran who don t want any kind of a nuclear deal just as in israel and the united states, opinion is split on whether a deal is advisable. it s like a chess board under water. good way to put it. 38 minutes after the hour. new this morning, hillary clinton s camp is firing back at the new york times report about her personal use of e-mails at the state department. now, it appears she only used her personal account or accounts there. one of her aides tells cnn that nothing shady was going on that her actions were in keeping with what former secretaries had done. mrs. clinton made no mention of this issue during a 30-minute speech tuesday night. cnn s brianna keilar has the latest including the re
nation came to america to school us on foreign policy. do you see it that way? no, i don t, because what we have learned so far as the prime minister said already classifies this as a bad deal for america. i actually think the pressure will result in our potentially getting a better deal knowing that what is being talked about right now and what has already been conceded is not where we need to go in terms of deterring iran from having nuclear weapon capability. so i think the pressure will help john kerry try to get a better deal and they know at least right now that where we ve gone so far is just simply not going to be acceptable with the american people and have grave consequences for the future not just of the middle east and israel but for america and the civilized world. i want to play a part of netanyahu s speech where he talked about why this deal is so bad. let s listen. this deal has two major
politics. [ applause ] today the jewish people face another attempt by yet another persian potent to destroy us. america s founding document promises life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. iran s founding document pledges death, tyranny and the pursuit of jihad. and the states are collapsing across the middle east. iran is charging into the void to do just that. iran s goons in gaza, lebanon. levy lucienary guard in golan heights are clutching israel with three tentacles of terror. backed by iran, assad is slaughtering syrians. backed by iran, shiites me issue wills militias are rampages iraq.