CONTRADICTIONS and CONFUSION: Israel, Tehran dispute details of Trump’s Iran deal

[0:00] President Trump says the text of the deal will likely be released only after a formal signing [0:05] ceremony on Friday. Meanwhile, confusion and contradictions continue. Israel's Prime Minister [0:12] Benjamin Netanyahu, for example, says Israeli forces will remain in Lebanon. Netanyahu added [0:18] in a defiant address yesterday, quote, the struggle has not ended. Iran's foreign minister [0:26] said this morning that continuing Israeli occupation of Lebanon would be a violation of the deal. [0:33] Meanwhile, on the Strait of Hormuz, Iran indicated yesterday it intends to charge fees for unspecified [0:40] services in the key waterway just one day after President Trump claimed it would be reopened and [0:46] be permanently toll free. And when it comes to potential reconstruction funding for Iran, [0:54] the president is pushing back on those reports. But a senior U.S. official told reporters yesterday [1:00] that the possibility of releasing frozen funds, sanctions reliefs and a big, big $300 billion [1:09] fund to rebuild, Iran was discussed and would be tied to performance. Joe, sounds like there's a lot [1:19] of work to do between now and Friday. Yes. And also a lot of work to be done between the president, [1:24] the vice president, their communications, because he accused that $300 million, billion dollar fee [1:29] being put out by Democrats. His vice president told CBS News that, yes, that $300 billion was [1:39] possible for Iran to get based on their behavior. So Democrats, no. Vice President J.D. Vance, yes. [1:49] You need to talk to J.D. Because he's the one that was telling everybody yesterday, confirming what [1:54] the Iranians were also saying. You know, Martin McKinnon, I thought from the beginning of this war [1:59] that it was deeply ironic that the president that, you know, a lot of people may think that [2:03] Donald Trump despises Barack Obama or Jimmy Carter the most. [2:09] George W. Bush, actually, for just like, pound for pound. I mean, [2:15] based on what I've heard him say, I mean, he just loathes George W. Bush and will tell anybody [2:22] who will listen to him how dumb and stupid Bush was for getting us into Iraq and not taking the oil. [2:27] One of the great ironies is he found himself in a similar position as George W. Bush, [2:34] where actually the stakes were much higher. The stakes were the world economy. Talk about, [2:40] you saw what getting tied down in the Middle Eastern war did to a president and the inability [2:46] to do anything else. Talk about what looks like at least desperation from this vantage point of this [2:53] president willing to give Iran pretty much what they wanted to get out of this war. [2:58] Yeah, Joe, a lot of PTSD that I'm having these days about the Iraq war and the parallels. [3:04] But the place where the parallels fall apart is, remember how actually popular the Iraq war was [3:09] when we went in. I mean, on a lot of those resolutions, they got 99 senators voting, including, [3:15] you know, everybody but one Democrat was supporting it and huge public support. This was never, [3:19] never, was never popular from the very beginning. And so, I mean, we have, you know, a Trump supporting [3:26] publication here, skeptical about the mystery deal. And I was thinking, you know, with Jim here on the [3:31] set, I'm a shallow media guy, so I can't really get into the substance of the deal. But what I can [3:36] think about is the politics of it. And think about the midterms and this deal. Where would you [3:41] rather be, attacking this deal or defending it, Jim? [3:44] A thousand percent? You want to attack this? You want to go straight at it? Mika's right. [3:48] The devil's in the details. We can't see the details. The more the details come out, the worse [3:53] this deal gets. It starts, this entire war starts out as very unpopular. And now it's going to get [3:59] worse as we see what they had to give Iran to get this deal done. I think this is going to age very [4:06] poorly. [4:06] And Jim, following up, I mean, there's also splits within the Republicans about this deal. First of [4:11] all, as noted, a number of them have questioned like, well, okay, what is the agreement? We haven't [4:15] even seen it yet. We have seen Lindsey Graham and others, more like Ted Cruz and some who are more, [4:21] would you consider Iran hawks, being at least skeptical, if not downright critical of concerning [4:26] where this could go. It feels like we know there are very few places where Republicans are willing [4:31] to defy Trump. But this seems like a spot where he is going to be open to some criticism. [4:34] I think Lindsey Graham is the best example here. He went straight out the vice president of the [4:38] United States. He said he wants J.D. Vance to come to the Hill and defend this because this is a deal [4:43] he made, which shows a couple things. They no longer think that J.D. Vance is going to be the [4:48] definite nominee of the party. And two, they're beginning to split on what they had to promise [4:54] to get this deal done. [4:55] Isn't it odd that Vance is out there, is the tip of the spear on this rather than Marco Rubio? [5:00] I agree. And now he is. And I think there's those who are looking towards 20, 28 on the Republican [5:05] side, Joe, say this is a pretty tough hand for J.D. Vance to have to play, that he is sort of like [5:10] left holding the bag. And it is remarkable, though. The secretary of state has been nowhere [5:14] on this around war. He has distanced himself from it from the start. [5:18] Yeah. You know, focused much more on Venezuela, focused on perhaps upcoming actions in Cuba [5:22] and other things. He is sort of clearly decided deliberately to keep his distance. [5:30] This is giving J.D. Vance Iran. It's like Joe Biden giving Kamala Harris the border. [5:38] It doesn't work out. And it's deliberate. It's not going to work out in the end for him, [5:46] especially when he's saying stupid things like, oh, well, you know, they've changed their way. [5:50] Do we have that clip yet, Dan? The clip where J.D. was on TV saying, oh, well, the Iranians [5:56] now, what's so neat is the Iranians have changed their way. It's not yet. Well, get that for me, [6:01] if you will. I think I asked for it in 1924. So let's get it before the next World Cup. [6:08] So anyway, now I forget exactly what I was going to say. Walter Isaacson, when is America going to [6:16] learn? Actually, I do remember what I was going to say. As a historian, when is America going to [6:21] learn that you can win every single battle militarily? We won every single battle in Vietnam [6:29] militarily. At the end of the war, General Hurdling tells a great story of one of our colonels saying [6:36] one of the Vietnamese colonels, you know, in 75, you know, you guys didn't beat us in a single [6:42] battle over the course of this entire war, over the course of the decade. And the response was from [6:49] the Vietnamese colonel, he said, well, that may be true. It's also completely irrelevant. You look at [6:55] Iraq. You look at Afghanistan. By the way, look at the American Revolution. [7:00] By the way, look at the American Revolution. We had trouble winning a lot of battles, [7:05] but we won the war. I think in the Revolutionary War, one of Washington's greatest achievements [7:13] was his retreat from Long Island, just staying alive for the next battle against the British. [7:21] And so when are we going to learn? When are American presidents going to learn? [7:26] It doesn't matter what your military might looks like in drawn-out battles. You can win [7:31] every military battle and still lose the war. And we keep doing it, and it sure as hell happened [7:37] here. Iran's going to be in a stronger position regardless of how this deal ends. Iran's going [7:43] to be in a stronger position after this war than they were before it. Yeah, I think we forget [7:48] that how strong nationalism can be. And when we go in, there's many historic examples. When [7:54] Eisenhower was thinking of going into Vietnam after the French lost at Denver, he asked Matthew [7:59] Ridgeway, what would it take? And the general says eight years and eight divisions. So Eisenhower [8:05] is smart enough not to do it, not to go in that way. It did take eight years and eight divisions, [8:10] and we still didn't win. The notion that you can bomb or try to invade a country and change the [8:19] government generally gets us mired down. And certainly the problem for me with the Trump [8:26] invasion attack on Iran is we didn't quite know what the point was. Was it to get the enriched [8:35] uranium out? Was it to get regime change? Was it to control the Strait of Hormuz? If you're a Colin [8:41] Powell, you say define your objectives. Tell me your aims, and then you figure out the resources you [8:46] need. But if you don't define what we're exactly doing, it's hard to balance the commitment with [8:52] the resources. Yeah, the smartest thing any president can do is look at how Colin Powell added to the [8:59] Weinberger Doctrine. Basically said, first of all, do we have support of Congress? Do we have support of [9:05] the American people? He answers there were no. And then he asks, tell me how this is going to end. [9:11] What's a triggering point? What do we have to achieve before we bring our troops home? We never had [9:18] any of that here, and that's one of the biggest problems. The president finally settled on no nukes [9:23] for Iran. But we're getting out of this deal right now, absolutely nothing other than I will talk [9:29] about it in 60 days. So that doesn't work. So, Jim Messina, I see these clips, and the old [9:38] politician in me thinks, I sure would like to run against that guy. Why wasn't I ever lucky enough [9:44] to run against that guy? I want to show you one of those clips right now. [9:50] The coolest thing about the progress we've made over the last few weeks is that you see people [9:57] within the Iranian system, senior leadership, even IRGC officials say, you know what, [10:02] we may have some animosity, we may have some mistrust, but we recognize the way that we've [10:07] done business with the United States for 47 years is a mistake. Let's try something else. We're going [10:12] to verify that, of course, but we're certainly willing to try something else if they comply. [10:17] I've seen the light. I've seen the light. Praise the Lord. I've seen the light. Yes, [10:23] the Revolutionary Guard, we are told by J.D. Vance has seen the light after we killed their [10:27] Supreme Leader, after we killed people that ran Parliament, after we killed people [10:31] that ran their defense industry, after we killed people that ran their intelligence, [10:37] like after we obliterated about half of the country, after we killed over 100 girls in a girls' school [10:45] on the first day of the war. They've seen the light. I'm sorry. Again, we don't know what's in [10:52] the deal. I'm always a big believer. You never know what's going to happen. The Soviet Union falls [10:57] overnight. Iran looks better 20 years after the invasion than they did at the time of the invasion. [11:03] These things have to play out. But I do know this, the Revolutionary Guard hasn't, like, hasn't seen, [11:10] like, a vision in the clouds, and they haven't suddenly found Jesus. And now they think, hey, [11:15] it's cool. Let's work with the United States, the great Satan, instead of working against them. [11:20] Oh, Joe, there's clips that you say to yourself, oh, my God, what was he thinking? Mark McKinnon is [11:26] sitting over here giggling because he'd love to make an ad against that clip. It is remarkably bad [11:33] politics, thinking that someday the Iranian guard is going to pull well in America. They're going to [11:38] be like, oh, yeah, he did a great job. He made him love America. These same people who said that [11:44] America is the great Satan that wanted to get rid of the entire Jewish state of Israel. Like, what are we [11:50] doing?