Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Contributor

An ego move


U.S. President Donald Trump has said a lot of things over the years about the Iran nuclear deal he just reneged on. 

So perhaps one of the most telling moments came Tuesday when the president fell silent as a reporter shouted a question to him. The president was holding aloft a signed executive order reinstating sanctions on Iran, effectively withdrawing the U.S. from the deal negotiated three years ago among six other world powers.

"How," the journalist asked, "does this make America safer?" 

Trump ignored her question. She repeated her query.

"Thank you very much," the president said, wrapping up. "This will make America much safer."

It was a non-answer that only served to confirm the suspicions of Suzanne Marlowe, deputy director of the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution.

"He couldn't answer. He didn't explain, he doesn't have an answer to that," Marlowe said. "If he's convinced the restrictions imposed were insufficient, or the monitoring of the regime was insufficient, how does the absence of these measures and restrictions provide greater security for the U.S.?"

And does this administration have a viable Plan B to re-engage Iran? The apparent answer, she said, is no.



One thing this move does is show N Korea that they can not trust any deal they might work out with the USA

16 Replies
Veteran Advisor

Re: An ego move

Reminds me of the review Mark Twain once wrote about JAMES Fenimore Cooper’s Last of the Mohicans. Trump feels the requirements the Iranian deal had were not sufficient enough to keep America safe. In Cooper’s book, several Indians were on an overhanging limb on a river waiting for a boat to pass underneath. When it came the first Indian jumped but he had waited too long and missed the boat. Indians 2,3 & 4 continued to jump one at a time and they all missed the boat a little further than the guy before. Now the correlation is that if the original requirements were not sufficient, HOW DOES DOING AWAY WITH THEM ENTIRELY MAKE IT BETTER?????????
Senior Contributor

Re: An ego move

Yet you think we can trust Iran or NK.......that`s funny stuff there....That pretty much sums up the side the liberals are on....Yeah...let`s put stock and trust into our enemies and the US is the devil.....You guys say and think it all the time....We see it..You obviously don`t....PS... John Kerry is a traitor to America and he was once your guy.....Hillary was your guy.....Obama was a your guy..... All traitors...See a pattern here?

Senior Advisor

Re: An ego move

Just curious, how does the US withdrawing from the agreement make it worse?  If Iran maintains the agreement with the other parties to the agreement, then wouldn't the objectives of the present agreement remain in force?  If Iran desires to improve relations with the US, wouldn't they attempt to renegotiate with the US to bring them back into the fold, or at least to avoid new sanctions?  Wasn't part of the reason the agreement took so long in the first place due to the habit of Iran wanting/demanding to renegotiate terms after they were already agreed?

Re: An ego move

Withdrawing a rather arduous and technical process.  Can happen, of course.


Where we are now is essentially in violation.

Senior Contributor

Re: An ego move

Snuberfart, it’s not that we wouldn’t be willing to keep the restrictions on them now. We ain’t going to look the other way while they continue to develop nukes under the limited restrictions and full bore in only seven years! But all of this is way over your head
Senior Contributor

Re: An ego move

To take a quote from Obama`s preacher, Rev. Wright......."God damn America"......In violation again....what are we thinking? Good news is, the creep that set up 911 has not endorsed Trumps CIA nomination....So, that should weigh heavily in your favor when the vote comes.........

Senior Contributor

Where did Aveneti get the info?

And he is not like a reporter, to use his information in court he has to reveal the source.  The leaker has to be either at the treasury or more likely in Mueller's team.  And why did they leak the info, on its own it really says nothing at all.   Running out of leads and time to smear or hoping to flush a rabbit?


via ny post:

The Treasury Department’s inspector general is investigating whether confidential banking information related to President Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen was leaked, the Washington Post reported Wednesday.

Rich Delmar, a counsel to the IG, said that in response to media reports, the office was “inquiring into allegations” that Suspicious Activity Reports on Cohen’s banking transactions were “improperly disseminated.”

Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels, released a summary of the information Tuesday, showing that a number of companies, including one connected to a Kremlin-linked Russian billionaire, paid Cohen’s firm more than $1 million, supposedly for assorted services.

Re: Where did Aveneti get the info?

The conventional wisdom is saying that it was available to him through the discovery process in an ongoing lawsuit.