Tag: Nuclear Deal

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America commend the Trump administration for reinstating sanctions on Iran after rescinding the failed nuclear deal, which the rogue regime did not follow. They also denounce Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth’s Warren’s far-left rhetoric about the criminal justice system and they blame the divisive discourse for the lack of meaningful reforms. And they are frustrated that President Donald Trump tweeted about LeBron James’ intelligence rather than thanking the NBA star for funding education and extolling the benefits of charter schools.

Jim and Greg are both on vacation this week.  They will be back June 25th.  There will new episodes with guest hosts Thursday and Friday of this week.  Today, please enjoy an encore presentation of the Three Martini Lunch.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are in very good spirits as they savor three wonderful martinis for conservatives.  First, they celebrate the news that three American hostages are on their way home from North Korea in advance of the upcoming Trump-Kim summit.  They also applaud President Trump for withdrawing the U.S. from the Iran nuclear deal, which was riddled with inspection loopholes and was never properly submitted to Congress.  And they cheer the victory of conservative Patrick Morrisey in the West Virginia U.S. Senate primary, the lopsided defeat for “Cocaine Mitch” accuser Don Blankenship, and strong turnout for Republicans in three primary states.

Trump Is Right on Iran


President Trump’s dramatic decision to withdraw from the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, marks a sea-change in American foreign policy in the Middle East. Under the deal, the United States and its allies had agreed to lift economic sanctions against Iran in exchange for its halting of the development of nuclear weapons for a fifteen-year period. Trump denounced the deal as “horrible,” while the United Kingdom, France, and Germany all lamented the breakdown of the agreement. They urged the Iranians to keep to their half of the bargain, even as the United States was poised to impose additional sanctions on Iran and indeed on any country that sought to do business with Iran.

The decision to break with the status quo in a time of apparent peace is always a risky venture that necessarily increases uncertainty. Nonetheless, the President should be commended for carrying through with his campaign promise to terminate the Iran deal. The single most important development in the Middle East over the past decade has been the systematic decline of American influence. Barack Obama went out of his way to find excuses for not using force in the Middle East. That attitude was manifest in President Obama’s decision to turn to Russia for assistance when the Syrians crossed his “red line” by using chemical weapons against civilians in its effort to stamp out insurrection within its borders.

To be sure, President Obama faced a ticklish situation in having to act militarily on his own initiative, given Congressional reluctance to endorse a strike. But the upshot of his equivocation was the military reentry of the Russians into Syria, coupled with the open and active support that the Iranian government has given to the murderous Bashar al-Assad. As a result, thousands have died and millions have been displaced. Elsewhere, ISIS made major territorial inroads that were not reversed until after President Obama left office, and the instability in Iraq led to the slaughter of too many Yazidis. Libya, too, has become a failed state. By “leading from behind,” President Obama escalated tensions and tragedy throughout the Middle East.

Now that President Trump has made good on a major campaign promise – pulling the U.S. out of the JCPOA Iran nuclear deal – the debate has begun whether it was the right move. Abbas Milani, a Hoover research fellow and the Hamid and Christina Moghadam Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, offers his opinion and explains how the change affects both the politics of Iran and the Middle East region.

Did you like the show? Please rate, review, and subscribe!

Eight years after Iran’s Green Movement and antigovernment protests, will the current unrest in the nation have no lasting impact or is it the beginning of the end for the repressive theocracy? Abbas Milani, a Hoover research fellow and the Hamid and Christina Moghadam Director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University, explains the nature of the uprising, Tehran’s response, and the Trump administration’s options.

Dumping the Iran Nuclear Deal Is a Terrible Idea


There’s word today that President Trump has made some momentous decision about the future of the Iranian nuclear deal. It’s possible that Trump (who is bad at keeping his mouth shut when he knows something) has already made a decision, and telegraphed it in his recent marks to the UN when he called the deal an “embarassment to the United States.”

As part of Congress’s acceptance of the Iranian nuclear deal (or rather, not making a fuss about it), the administration is required to report every three months on whether the Iranians are complying with it. And the Iranians are complying. There is no evidence of a breach of the deal by Iran.

The main complaint I see from those who want to scrub the deal, because they haven’t breached the agreement, is Iranian missile tests. Either they are “provocative” or “violate the spirit of the agreement,” or something along those lines.  

The Iran Deal: Choosing Sides


194308Geraldo Rivera on Fox Business just now, rebuking critics of the Iran deal:

Too bad, we are moving forward. This is not an existential threat to Israel or any place else. This is the future.

On Facebook, our own Mona Charen: