Transcription
The CIA director and the Secretary of State doubting the agreement with Iran tonight. This is according to a new report just breaking from Axios, which reports that CIA Director John Ratcliffe reportedly told President Trump that U.S. intelligence raised serious doubts about Iran's willingness to make the nuclear concessions the United States wants. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth both also expressing concerns about the deal.
All of that is hugely significant, and there is real anger coming from some of Trump's allies publicly to Trump and claim they've already signed the agreement, but they've refused to let anybody see it. And tonight, some of Trump's most visible supporters are crying foul. The Iranians may comply for a short period of time, but then we're going to have a weak American president and they're going to have gotten the money. And then there's talk about reconstruction, fond of hundreds of billions of dollars. We didn't. They'll be like doing a Marshall Plan for Germany while the Nazis were still in power. So I'm anxious to see what what the details of the deal are and what gets negotiated. But I'm concerned.
And those concerns, he's referring to questions of whether Iran could have access to $300 billion just by holding up its end of the deal, and another Fox News host and longtime Trump backer, Mark Levin, is raising his hand, too. Posting on social media today, and I quote Mark Levin, "I've asked for days, why can't we the people, see the damn MOU that stands for Memorandum of Understanding, not for people briefed by an anonymous person. Honestly, I've never seen anything like this. If it's a great outcome for peace, then release it. If Trump has surrendered to Iran."
That is how conservative Erick Erickson is describing the little known agreement between the United States and Iran that was signed virtually yesterday. Erickson took his criticism even further, claiming those who kill Americans have the steal. But the truth is, we don't know what exactly was agreed to. And what we do know changes. Depends on who you ask. Questions remain about whether Iran will have access to billions of dollars of frozen funds and what, if any, concessions Iran has already agreed to. And while the White House claims that the Strait of Hormuz will be open toll-free, Iranian officials say it will have fees. Even the question of when we will actually see the text of this agreement isn't clear. J.D. Vance says maybe tomorrow, Trump says Friday.
But Erickson is not the only Republican taking issue with the lack of transparency around this deal. Fox News host Mark Levin questions why the American people can't see the quote "damn MOU." "If it's a great outcome for peace, then release it." He added, "Don't brief a few anointed ones to control the narrative and expect everyone else to sit silently. Controlling the narrative can only last so long."
And a new Axios report finds that there are some skeptics in this administration. Two sources tell them that the CIA director, John Ratcliffe, advised Trump on some intelligence that raises serious doubts about Iran's willingness to make nuclear concessions. The sources also told Axios that Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary of both, expressed concerns based on that intelligence.
Now, while Vance, Steve Wyckoff and Jared Kushner have all advocated for this deal, we are now sitting here. I guess more than a day after, apparently, the United States and Iran have signed on to some kind of agreement. We don't have any text. We just have anonymous officials. They won't even put their names on the statement. Fighting over what is in it. And I do think one of the basic things is if this agreement is a page and a half long and it doesn't actually have any hard commitments on the nuclear issue, why are we even talking about sanctions relief? Why are we even talking about reconstruction funds or releasing any money at all?
While we're talking to them, because we want this conflict to end and we want to get to an ultimate goal where Iran doesn't have any or the capacity to make any nuclear weapons. That is the principal goal. That's number one. Number two, it would be wise for the administration to put this document out for everybody to look at. And they ought to do it as soon as they can, both for their allies who are interested, but also for the American people, because we've gone to war here. The American people deserve to know how this is going to come to an end. Number three, I talked to the president on Sunday, and he was, you know, telling me he was about to sign something with Iran. And he did, and he was excited to get the Strait of Hormuz open. But he said something very important to me, which is, look, if they don't follow through on their commitments, we will start hitting them again. He's clearly not taking further military action off the table. So we have some miles to travel down this road. The next mile will be on Friday when there's a formal signing for the people who don't trust Iran. Look, I agree with you. I think an Iranian signature is worth very, very little. But it could be worth something if the president keeps his Middle Eastern coalition together.
What is your understanding of what this deal actually accomplishes? The accomplishment here principally, would be getting all the nuclear material and destroying this deal. That's not what you get out about. What's in this deal? No, that's that's the goal. No, I'm asking you, what do you think? This. Oh, sorry. I understand that the memorandum of understanding. Yeah. So 60 days cease-fire. Open the Strait of Hormuz, and you have a window to finalize the discussions about ending a nuclear program. The president believes he's got them to agree to do that. They have 60 days to finalize that. And again, I'll just stress, as he said to me on Sunday, if they don't follow through on that, I'll start hitting them again.
I say 60 days now. You believe this? Can I just say that on what Scott was saying on the MOU, 60 days to negotiate anything with Iran when it comes to its nuclear program? We're not even talking about its ballistic missile program, its support to its proxies. 60 days is aspirational at best. I think what we understand this agreement to be is trying to restore the strait to pre-war conditions where there was freedom of navigation that flew and international law was upheld. But right now, we don't even know the details of this agreement because Iran is saying that they're going to they're going to charge some type of fee for ships going in and out of the strait, which would be highly illegal under international law. But not only that, we don't know when the strait is open. We don't know when the blockade is ending and we don't know. I mean, the only the only ones that can determine if the strait is open. It's not Iran, it's not the United States, it's the shipping companies. If the shipping companies feel confidence that they can sail through the strait unimpeded and safely, then they will do it. But we don't know that.
Well, I think that Charles, he wanted to get in. Well, the point you make about whether or not the strait will be open is, I think, the crucial one. The people who who to study this think it will take months to clear it of mines, let alone try to figure out new navigation lanes that the Iranians want to put into effect in order to collect some fees. And then you have to worry about whether or not the shipping companies will be able to pay the insurers they have there. Nothing worse for it, which is like a 900% increase in their insurance costs from before this war started. And the insurance companies have to be reassured and that they can bring those costs down, and that the shipping companies have to be reassured that they will be able to pay the new costs to get through it. No one believes that this happens in a couple of months. So the idea that we can this deal may start the reopening, but it will not reopen the strait. I mean, I don't even know that we should even be calling it a deal of any kind, because just to be clear, if it's a deal, you should be able to say before you even sign it. Here's what we both agreed to do. And did you know that John Thune, Senate Majority Leader, has not even been briefed? He told Manu Raju today he has not been briefed at all. I did know that because I listened to Matt and nobody and the Israelis are asking, what's in this deal? What what under what circumstances with the United States, sign a document with Iran and not tell anybody. And it's, you know, I mean, if so, J.D. Vance told Jake Tapper that it is a page and a half. My tweets longer than that. Grocery shopping list for Thanksgiving is longer than that. So it's not like they that briefing them on what's in this MOU should be that difficult, because there doesn't seem to be that much in that MOU. I think it feels like it's kicking the can down the road and giving them 60 days to come up with something else. But you know, Donald Trump has done a terrible job selling this entire thing from the beginning. He never went in front of the American people. He never went in front of Congress. To explain it thoroughly. I think he gets another shot at doing it now, and he should do it. And he should do it expeditiously, because a lot of these attacks are coming from inside the house. So if he doesn't even have his allies on board for selling this, he needs to be clear and transparent with the American people and certainly with Congress, because if he's going to be disbursing any money, they've got to authorize first.
On that point, there's there's no dispersal of funds. I know, and this is what I wanted to address. I think the administration today has been pretty upset about what they say is misinformation flying around out there from some of. Information like if I, if I, if I make it that simple, if I may, the quickest way to dispel any misinformation would of course, be to put the document out and say, here's what our intentions are when we get to Friday, and here's what our intentions are over the 60-day period. So hopefully they do that in the next 24 hours. And that'll bring like, here's one other 30 benefits. It doesn't it doesn't count to claim we are not going to be disbursing funds if there's a $300 billion fund that we are authorizing to be disbursed to the Iranians, which I'll play what J.D. Vance said about that, that is not actually being disputed by the administration.
Listen, the Iranians are saying that they're going to have access to a $300 billion reconstruction fund, true or false? Well, that's the sort of thing they could have access to, funded by the Gulf Coast Coalition, so long as they honor their end of the obligation. We absolutely are open to the Gulf Coast countries investing in the reconstruction of Iran, but only if Iran ends their nuclear program, ends their enriched stockpile of material. And if it's really open to an inspections and enforcement regime that gives the American people confidence they're never going to have a nuclear weapon. So there it is. What are they? Look, I mean, I don't think you said it in a call that. Reflects more than Obama negotiator. Whether you're right, I played the pattern or whether when when the JCPOA was signed, the money was not taxed. Money that was a thing that was already held in frozen accounts. So it doesn't matter if it's our money or not. It's a good point. Even if it is, the Gulf States money, I don't think the median GOP base voter is going to be particularly thrilled with the notion of releasing $300 billion in funds to the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. That's not why we got into this. But here's what I will say. Me personally, I'm a bomb. The terrorist guy. If that didn't work and I was president, I would probably just bomb the terrorists some more. But I'm not the president. Donald Trump is. He was elected on a kind of dual message one the Iranians can never have a nuclear weapon. And two, we're also not going to get into endless quagmire wars in the Middle East. To me, this looks like the execution of that. Can I just tell you that at the bottom of the curve, militarily, we both agree on. But bombing Iran into submission did not work well. And Iran, maybe they. In March, the president tweeted that Iran unconditionally surrender and that just has not happened.