Return to Transcripts main page
The Source with Kaitlan Collins
Trump Defends His Iran Agreement Amid Backlash; Trump Jokes He'll Blame Vance If Iran Agreement Falls Through; Blanche Tried To Mend Fences With Conservative Group That Pushed 2020 Election Conspiracies. Aired 9-10p ET
Aired June 17, 2026 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:00]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, ANDERSON COOPER 360: --I'm not sure how many jugs they're going to have to pour in there. But at this rate, they might still be working on this on July 4th.
DAVID FAHRENTHOLD, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Yes, it's hundreds and hundreds of gallons of hydrogen peroxide. I mean, remember, how much Trump talked about how big the pool is?
COOPER: Yes.
FAHRENTHOLD: So now imagine trying to thin it out with hydrogen peroxide and suck out the algae one clump at a time. Right. They're saying that the permanent filter will be in place next week. Maybe we'll see some improvement. But there's not many days left.
COOPER: All right, we'll be watching.
David Fahrenthold, thanks so much, appreciate it as always.
That's it for us. The news continues. "THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS" starts now.
KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, CNN HOST, THE SOURCE WITH KAITLAN COLLINS: As we come on the air from Geneva tonight, President Trump is in the air, on his way back to the United States, with what sources say is a gentleman's agreement with Iran.
While he touted the praise that the agreement yielded, from other world leaders who were here at the G7 Summit, and who very much want this war to end. The President is flying back to a Washington that is filled with skepticism, anger, and outright disbelief, and I'm talking about, from Republicans and his own allies.
Initially, the President argued today that the document doesn't signal the end of what's going on with Iran, and therefore didn't warrant his own famous signature.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I'd rather -- this is a memorandum of understanding. It's very important, but it might not be the kind of a document that I should be signing.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: But he did ultimately sign the document, actually, again tonight. His aides posted this video of the President putting that signature on a hard copy of the agreement, as he was having dinner with the French President at the Palace of Versailles.
It was not immediately clear why, given what the President said earlier, and also how sources had told us that both the President and the Vice President had already signed an electronic version on Sunday. Regardless, the details in this page and a half document run counter to what the President has been demanding throughout this war, and going back years.
There are 14 specific points in the memo that has now been confirmed by the White House. The very first point listed says that both sides will, quote, "Refrain from the threat or use of force against each other," and it's something the President already seems to be hedging on.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: If I don't like it, if they don't behave, we'll go right back to dropping bombs right smack in the middle of their head.
If it doesn't get done in 60 days, that's all right, we go back to bombing, you know. I don't want to do that because, it's so good, but we might have to.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: And the President, who back in February, when this war started, urged the Iranian people to keep protesting, and that help was on the way, and that this was their chance for generational change inside their country. He just committed the United States to actually stay out of Iran's domestic affairs, with his signature on this document tonight.
Regarding another promise that a bigger, more detailed deal is just 60 days away. This is how the President is framing things now.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Do you see the 60 days as a hard deadline for a final agreement?
TRUMP: No, I don't, no.
REPORTER: Did you talk to your team--
TRUMP: Could take longer.
REPORTER: So you could extend--
REPORTER: You could extend this case? TRUMP: I don't view it as hard, no.
REPORTER: You don't think of it as a hard deadline for final--
TRUMP: No. Just as long as they're behaving, I really don't care that much.
REPORTER: How long will you leave the U.S. military in the Gulf?
TRUMP: It's a good question. We haven't thought of it. We're really -- probably a while. It's good place to stay.
The question was, how long will you leave the military in the Gulf? I would say a little while, see how it all goes. I think it's going to go well. But we'll see.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Also, after months of insisting that the Strait of Hormuz was already open, the President did acknowledge today that it was part of what drove him to make this deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: The Strait will never be opened. Because people that own billion-dollar ships, these ships cost $1 billion, they don't like sailing ships or having their ships participate, when you go up the coast, and you go through the Strait, and there are rockets flying over your head. They want to protect their billion-dollar investment. You wouldn't have oil for, well, maybe years.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: According to this document that the President has now signed, Iran has only committed to allow the, quote, safe passage of commercial vehicles with no charge for 60 days only.
And the fact that Iran stands to gain access to hundreds of billions of dollars is also proving harder tonight for the administration to explain and justify to their own allies.
[21:05:00]
While the White House insists that the money will only change hands, if Iran meets some undefined performance goals. There are key provisions that go into place immediately after signing. Those include allowing Iran immediately to start selling its oil per the signature on this agreement. Sources say that could earn $60 billion to $70 billion per year.
Also, in this agreement, the unfreezing of Iranian assets, which could be upwards of $100 billion. On that front, compare what the President had to say when President Obama, for example, unfroze some Iranian assets, as part of that 2015 nuclear deal, with what President Trump said today about unfreezing assets and his deal.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I would have never given them back the money. I would have said, The money is off the table. Let's start negotiating. And you know what? I would have won that negotiation.
Well, the unfreezing, it's an easy one to answer. We have taken a lot of their money, and we have their money. We have taken them.
We can't continue to make deals like that horrible Iran deal, where we give them $150 billion back.
They don't want to have a little conflict with somebody and end up having the United States just take their money. So if you do that, you really don't have a system.
The Iran deal was so bad, we paid a $150 billion to sign a horrible agreement.
It's not our money, it's their money, and we froze it. At a certain point in time, I guess we're going to have to give it back. You know, if we didn't give it back, nobody would ever invest in the dollar again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, two days after the President said those reports about a $300 million reconstruction fund for Iran were fake news, that provision is indeed in the agreement that the administration unveiled today. Only, its $300 billion. Not $300 million.
The President says, that money is going to come from other nations investing in Iran, not from the United States, and not from taxpayer dollars. But, of course, there are still questions that remain about how that's going to work, and how the United States is going to play a role in setting up that fund, as is in the agreement.
Part of what's also striking, as you read through several of these points that the administration confirmed today, is what's not in the agreement, including several of the objectives that the President laid out at the beginning of this war.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: We are going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. We're going to ensure that the region's terrorist proxies can no longer destabilize the region or the world.
Our objectives are clear. First, we're destroying Iran's missile capabilities.
Our objectives are very simple and clear. We are systematically dismantling the regime's ability to threaten America or project power outside of their borders.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Now, almost remarkably, the President is arguing that Iran should be able to keep its missile program.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I said, Well, what am I going to do? Am I going to let Saudi Arabia have missiles, but they can't have them?
Yes, sir.
It can't -- doesn't work that way, you know? It doesn't work that way. And missiles aren't the problem.
I'm saying that if other countries have them, it's a little bit unfair for them not to have some. A ballistic missile is not the same thing as what we're talking about, when we talk nuclear. But if Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and they all have some, I would say in relative proportion, I think it's OK.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Overall, the President is arguing that the last four months of this war, the economic pain that has been felt around the world, and everything that Iran is now getting as part of this agreement, is worth it to prevent them from having a nuclear weapon.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: That's what was all about. That was about 99 percent Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, they can't develop it, buy it, they can never have a nuclear weapon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: But compare the language that the President just signed off on tonight. You saw him signing this document. In it, it says this. Quote, "The Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons."
Compare that with the language that was in the document President Obama signed, that said, quote, "Under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons."
The reality tonight is that the President has signed his name to a document that achieves few of the objectives that he laid out at the beginning of this war. Something I tried to question him on as he was leaving that press conference today.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: Why are you backing off your initial goals?
REPORTER: --Mr. President?
COLLINS: Why are you backing off your initial goals, Mr. President?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:10:00]
COLLINS: My lead source tonight is Ambassador Wendy Sherman, who led the team that negotiated the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran under President Obama.
And it's great to have you here tonight.
Because now that we've seen the confirmed copy of this agreement that we all saw the President signing tonight at Versailles. What are your first thoughts?
WENDY SHERMAN, FORMER DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE, LEAD U.S. NEGOTIATOR FOR 2015 IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL: Well, your mashup was quite instructive, I think, to everyone.
You know, the President said that he wanted unconditional surrender from Iran. In fact, looking at this MOU, such as it is, it's really as if the United States is unconditionally surrendering. It's OK for Iran to have ballistic missiles. It's OK for them to be in the region. Other countries have civil nuclear programs, they should be allowed to have one too, maybe even enrich uranium. We'll see what we can come up with. We have a gentleman's agreement.
Everything is incredibly ill-defined, as were the goals for this war of choice. No other president, Democrat or Republican, engaged in such a war because, they knew that Iran could use the Strait of Hormuz as leverage, they knew that Iran could attack our Gulf partners and allies, and they thought it was a better idea to try diplomacy. Diplomacy is hard work, it requires patience, a lot of expertise from lots of different fields, and a lot of time.
I think the President gave us a clue today why we're here. He said he doesn't want to be Herbert Hoover. He talked about how the markets have started to go up, how the price of gasoline has gone down. I thought it was sort of strange to say it was going down $7 or $8 when in fact it isn't quite that high in a lot of places.
So, we are in a really, I think, unfortunately bad place. The only thing I can say, as well, is the President's not very good at taking the second step.
He said that he would solve Ukraine in a day. But it got hard. So, he stepped away, and he didn't want to confront Vladimir Putin.
He said that he was going to help out with Gaza, and he wanted to have a reconstruction plan for Gaza. None of that has really gone anywhere.
Not even Venezuela has really taken the next steps that he said would happen, other than for him to try to grab some of Venezuela's oil.
COLLINS: Yes.
SHERMAN: My fear is--
COLLINS: Yes, I mean, Hillary Clinton did have nice things to say about the-- (CROSSTALK)
COLLINS: --the Gaza plan.
But can I ask you -- can I ask you -- and when you hear a senior administration official describe this as a gentleman's agreement, what do you read into that?
SHERMAN: I read into that, that all of this has been done through a mediator, not in direct talks. So, Iran has sent a message through the mediator, and who knows whether it's the exact language that, We'll do X, Y, and Z. The President said, We'll do X, Y, and Z.
But I know the Iranians. Abbas Araghchi, who's the Foreign Minister, was my counterpart. Iran is a very litigious country. It cares about every single word. It's very good at putting in words that could mean many different things. And so, unless you've got it down on paper, no gentleman's agreement is worth anything.
COLLINS: Obviously, the President has repeatedly trashed the deal, that you negotiated. That took 18 months.
The President is now looking ahead to the next 60 days here in terms of Iran, and nuclear weapons, and the highly enriched uranium. Can you see them getting to an agreement within 60 days on this?
SHERMAN: No. It took us 107 days to get here, to end a war that cost American citizens an enormous amount in their family budgets, in their summer plans. It crippled, or began to cripple, the world's economy. It created terrible problems for our farmers, and it undermined our credibility around the world.
Now, everybody, I'm sure, at the G7, you may -- know better than I do because you're there, is happy that the war part ostensibly is over, and that the Strait of Hormuz will open again.
But the President clearly said today, as you pointed out, that he'll go back to bombing if Iran doesn't come through. I think the world won't want him to go back to bombing because, Iran knows now it can close the Strait of Hormuz, and it's only committed to not charging any kind of a fee for 60 days. So, there's a lot to go here.
Iran has come out stronger, a more hardline regime, and in many ways, sadly, even though we have a phenomenal military who did their job, we had no strategy, and because of the President, we are weaker in the world.
[21:15:00]
COLLINS: Do you agree with what a Republican senator said today, Bill Cassidy? He called it the worst foreign policy blunder, in decades.
SHERMAN: Well, I certainly think there is some validity to what Senator Cassidy said. Unfortunately, everybody has done something that hasn't really worked out the way we thought. And America, constantly, unfortunately, believes that because we have such an exquisitely capable military, that we can do almost anything. And our military is extraordinary. But adversaries who are smaller than we are, don't have the military that we have, use asymmetrical means, like closing the Strait of Hormuz, like targeting our allies and partners. And we keep on repeating this sense of ourselves. It's why you always need a threat of force in service to diplomacy. But diplomacy should be the first resort, not as was in this case, the last resort.
COLLINS: Ambassador Wendy Sherman, thank you for joining us tonight.
Also here, are two of my top sources throughout this war who have been with us almost every night.
Barak Ravid, who is the Axios correspondent, and also our CNN Political and Global Affairs Analyst.
And Brett McGurk, the former Middle East and North Africa Coordinator on the National Security Council.
And Brett, just as you read through this document, do you think the U.S. got a good deal here?
BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, FORMER MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA COORDINATOR, NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: Yes, Kaitlan, I think we've been talking on your program here over the last month, I think with the stalemate in the Strait, we had three options. You can cave, concede Iran's demands. You could endure, try to withstand the economic pressure as our blockade builds pressure on Iran. Or you could try a military campaign to try to seize control the Strait, very risky.
What happened here is we basically caved. I think we have conceded significantly to what the Iranians have long demanded from us, including in negotiations I've been in with them, in terms of releasing frozen funds, waiving their oil, petrochemical, banking sanctions, which is a massive concession. We've kind of put that all up front, that's in the document.
And then just in the past hour, I mean, extraordinary, actually, the first time I think ever since the 1979 Revolution, we have a document between Iran and the United States, signed by the President of the United States and the President of Iran. This has never happened before.
And I think, as Wendy just alluded to, the Iranians will hold us to every word in this document. It now has the President's signature, and they will hold us to every word. I went through it in detail today, some of it was like a jigsaw puzzle, as often negotiations are with Iran. Certain clauses open others.
But there are real commitments that the U.S. has signed on to, in exchange for very few commitments from Iran, other than a temporary opening, and agreement not to fire on ships, in the Strait of Hormuz. And even the future of the Strait of Hormuz is not -- is not really defined in this agreement, and Iran is asserting its sovereignty over it, long-term. So, that's where we are.
COLLINS: I mean, Barak, to hear the President today, saying he didn't want to be like Herbert Hoover, and talking about U.S. -- or talking about oil supplies being depleted, and the bedlam that it would cause, should they be totally wiped out. I mean, it was quite remarkable. But it also was an insight into how the President got to this point today, where he's not achieving the goals he laid out at the beginning of this war.
BARAK RAVID, CNN POLITICAL & GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST, GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT, AXIOS: Yes, Kaitlan, definitely.
When you look at the -- when you remember what the President said ahead of the war, what the President said during the war, about what he hopes to achieve, I think it's clear that the President settled for far less.
And I think that what he said about not wanting to be Herbert Hoover is very true. Because, I think that pretty early on, during this war, I think President Trump realized that the economic cost of this war is going to be tremendous. And for some time, he was still saying, Well, it's just an excursion, it will be OK, it will end soon, another two weeks, another week, another few days.
At the end of the day, this has been going on for more than a 100 days. And if this would have gone a bit further, then the U.S. strategic oil reserves would be totally depleted, and then the economic crisis would be even deeper, and I think the President saw it and just decided to cut his losses.
COLLINS: Brett, how much money is Iran going to get out of this, do you think? How big is this financial incentive for them in this agreement?
MCGURK: Well, the immediate windfall, and it says that this has to happen immediately, are the waivers on oil petrochemical trade. So, this -- it will take time to get those exports moving again.
[21:20:00]
But experts who have looked at this -- I think I said on your show last week, if this is where we come, at least about a billion dollars a week, if you add it up over a course of a year, $60 billion, $70 billion or so, I think, as you alluded to at the front of the program, is what experts are looking at, and if you look at market prices and what Iran can probably produce. Again, at market prices. That is, they have not been able to do that since the JCPOA, and that was in exchange for significant nuclear commitments, which are not being made here.
On the frozen funds. There's about a $100 billion or so around the world. There's some immediate pots in Qatar, in Oman, in Iraq. I used to deal with this, and sometimes we release them for limited humanitarian, non-sanctionable trade. What this agreement, this MOU says is that these funds will be basically released for beneficiaries that Iran designates. So, they're basically released for Iran's open use. Again, we have not had that in, I think, over a decade or so, since the era of the JCPOA.
It's a lot of money. It's a lot of money. And the hardliners in Iran, the Revolutionary Guard, I think, probably like this deal because they're going to ingest that economic windfall without any commitments in terms of their ultimate direction in the region, supporting Hezbollah proxies, restoring the missile program. I -- just past is prolog.
COLLINS: Yes.
MCGURK: That is what Iran is likely to do with this -- with these resources.
COLLINS: I mean, Barak, you got to look at how Israel is viewing this, as the President today kind of alternated between praising Bibi Netanyahu, as they started this war together, and also criticizing him for what Israel has been doing in Lebanon as they've been going after Hezbollah.
The President confirmed today, they did send them a copy of the agreement. What do you make of the reaction out of there tonight?
RAVID: Well, I think that the main thing about the reaction is that there has been no reaction. Prime Minister Netanyahu is silent for now, and he's silent for a good reason. Because, A, it's one of those things that he can only blame himself because, I think a lot of the reason that we got to this result is also because he lacked a clear strategy going into this war.
Netanyahu came into this war with a regime change plan, a regime change plan that was not the most thought-through plan. And it fell apart, and there was no plan B. And Netanyahu finds himself now, isolated, not only internationally, but also pretty much on his own, in Washington.
I was waiting to hear whether Netanyahu is going to come to Congress and give a speech, or go on Fox News, and say that it's a terrible deal. Well, I don't think that's going to happen.
COLLINS: Why not?
RAVID: Well because, Benjamin Netanyahu doesn't want and cannot really go into a confrontation with President Trump, like he went to with President Obama.
So, Mike Johnson is not going to get a phone call from Benjamin Netanyahu, asking him if he can come immediately to give a speech to Congress against this deal.
And Sean Hannity is also not going to get a phone call from Benjamin Netanyahu, telling him that he wants to go on air immediately to say that this is a bad deal.
COLLINS: Barak Ravid. Brett McGurk. It's always excellent to have both of your excellent analysis here. Thank you for joining us. Up next. We're also getting reaction from lawmakers, Republicans and Democrats. They had questions before this was public. We'll tell you what Republicans are even saying now. We've got Senator Roger Marshall joining me right after this.
[21:25:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Now that the details of President Trump's agreement with Iran are out. The reviews from Republicans on Capitol Hill are in.
We heard from Senator Ted Cruz, who told The Hill, quote, History teaches that giving billions of dollars to lunatics who want to murder us is not a good idea.
Senator Thom Tillis told CNN, "The 14 points are not sufficient for me to say it's a good deal so there's a lot of work to be done." And he added, "I have to see facts on a page that are binding for me to feel like the treasure and the lives we've lost to this point were worth it."
And Senator Bill Cassidy and other Republicans said it is the worst foreign policy blunder in decades. That's putting it lightly, in the very lengthy post where he said that President Ronald Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
My next source tonight is another Republican senator, Senator Roger Marshall from Kansas.
Senator, is Bill Cassidy right or wrong, that this is the worst foreign policy blunder in decades?
SEN. ROGER MARSHALL (R-KS): No, this is a great day for America. Look, Americans are done with forever wars, and Americans deserve affordable gas and groceries, and this agreement accomplishes just that. And beyond that, and more importantly, Americans are safer today than they were before.
This regime has never signed a document that said that they would not have any nuclear weapons in the past. That was our goal out of all this. This regime is responsible for the deaths of over a thousand Americans. They caused the rest of the world to live in fear in so many ways.
So, in so many ways, the world is safer, Americans are safer, the Strait is open again, and gas prices are plummeting. So, we think it's a great day here in America.
COLLINS: But Iran has committed before to not having a nuclear weapon. I mean, they did so on the first page of the Obama era nuclear deal. So, why do you trust them now?
[21:30:00]
MARSHALL: Well, of course, remember, Iran never signed that document, right? So, they never signed that document. This is the first time that they've signed a document. They're inviting the atomic energy folks to come in and participate in getting rid of their current nuclear program, the nuclear dust as well.
And I think that this is a trust, but verify program that we've offered them. And so, I think that we're not going to release all this money that's been sanctioned until they pass these certain events, and we've given them a timeline as well.
Again, this is just a memorandum of understanding. There's more work to do. But if they don't get it done in 60 days, they may become glass. So, I think that that's the alternative here. At the end of the day, the goal is for American safety.
COLLINS: Do you really think the President would start bombing Iran again in 60 days, when we're that much closer to the midterm elections? And today, he was saying, he didn't want to be a Herbert Hoover-style president and have gas prices as high as they are.
MARSHALL: Look, I would never speak for the President. I think you have to leave all options on the table, especially the timing of it. But I think it would be a two-week event, and we could really bomb them back to the Dark Ages just in two weeks.
I think that you have to do one or the other. We have to rip the band- aid off and just bomb them until there's no tomorrow, or else get this agreement done. We want Americans to be safe for centuries to come, not just this week. We need a long-term solution. This agreement offers a long-term solution, and at the same time, it's bringing down, again, the cost of gas and groceries back home.
And again, I just got to keep coming back, as I listen to all your other guests, it sounds like they want forever wars. And I don't know what other alternatives we have, except just to keep turning the other cheek, letting them kill more Americans in the future, or else turn this into another forever war. And President Trump doesn't want that, Americans don't want it, and I don't want it.
COLLINS: Senator, are you OK with Iran having missiles?
MARSHALL: You know what, I'm hesitating. I prefer that they not. I sort of don't want them to have long-distance missiles. I don't want them to have nuclear-armed missiles. I would prefer they didn't. But I don't think that's the key issue here. I think that they have to be able to defend themselves.
And I just kind of come back to the big picture here, is that the Middle East countries like this agreement. They--
COLLINS: You think Iran needs to be able to defend itself?
MARSHALL: I do. I think that they have to be able to defend themselves. Otherwise, we turn this into a forever war. You're never going to get them short of boots on the ground of surrendering everything, an unconditional agreement, if you will. But again, what I'm getting at here is this agreement has the support of all the -- most of the countries in the Middle East, and I think that's going to give it more of a long-lasting relationship, a long- lasting success as well.
COLLINS: But unconditional surrender and razing their missile industry to the ground, those were two things the President said at the beginning of this war, he wanted to do. I mean, neither of those have happened. Now he's saying that they should keep their missiles.
MARSHALL: Well, listen, I think we went in there with a very clear purpose, that we wanted to destroy their missile systems, their navy, their military, decrease their ability to fund other foreign terrorists, and of course be able to eliminate their ability to have nuclear weapons in the future.
I want to argue that we're 85 percent there on the missile systems, we're a 100 percent there on the navy. And certainly, we just destroyed their economy. Look at their economy. No one's talking about that. We have destroyed their economy in so many ways, they have 70 percent inflation, the average GDP income right now, per capita income, in Iran, is the equivalent of somebody in Haiti, which is the poorest country in this hemisphere. So, we have destroyed them militarily, economically. We've negotiated this from a position of strength, and that's why it's one more reason why--
COLLINS: Well on that front--
MARSHALL: --it's such a solid document.
COLLINS: OK. So, you're saying it's a good thing that their economy is destroyed. In 2021, you said that relieving sanctions on Iran, in your words, quote, would "Only contribute to more terror attacks against America and its allies."
This includes lifting sanctions on Iran. I mean, if they have $60 billion to $70 billion a year that they get from oil, will America be safer?
MARSHALL: I think under this agreement they will be. Look, you're comparing a different set of time. What was going in, in 2021 to today, it's a completely different day. We are now negotiating from a point of power.
Look, this is a two-way agreement. You can't have everything you want, and all the President is doing is letting them to start get back on their feet. I really think this probably only means about $30 billion. They're still already selling about $30 billion a year in oil. This will probably bring it up to $60 billion. Their whole economy maybe $400 billion or $500 billion.
[21:35:00]
So, I think you have to let them, you know, help themselves a little bit here as well. But everything beyond this is a trust, but verify situation. So, let's give them a chance, even this just for 60 days, let's give them a chance to start, you know, bringing their economy back together, rather than Americans dumping money in, which was what Barack Obama did. He sent them $1.7 billion of hard-earned American cash up front, as well. So, this is just letting them earn their own money, their own way. That seems fair to me.
COLLINS: He unfroze Iranian assets. The President defended doing the same today, which is part of this agreement. Are you OK with lifting sanctions on Iran and unfreezing Iranian assets, Senator?
MARSHALL: Again, this -- yes, again, this is the trust, but verify portion of this. As long as they meet all the other conditions of it, we can keep doing that. But then we can slap them back on.
Again, I go back to what President Obama did; he lifted these oil sanctions under his agreement, and no one criticized him for doing that. And then Joe Biden basically just turned his head and ignored that they were even in existence.
So, I think that we have to give them some slack. But this President has proved over and over again that he can snap these sanctions back. Here's a 60-day trial, a memorandum of understanding--
COLLINS: But just to be clear--
MARSHALL: --60 days, to get through this.
COLLINS: There's no -- there is no requirement they have to meet to get waivers to sell oil. They can start doing that right now. Are you OK with that?
MARSHALL: Absolutely. I think, again, we had to get them to sign the document. So, we gave that up in response for them giving up their nukes. So, would I give them $30 billion of their own money back, for them to agree to never build a nuclear weapon? Of course, I'll take that deal every time. And President Trump leveraged that, I think, perfectly. The timing was perfect.
And we'll see what happens in 60 days. I understand there's a lot more to be written out. I don't know what the final document is going to look like. But at the end of the day, the shooting has stopped, gas prices, grocery starts -- grocery prices are starting to come down as well. And again, this is a 110-day war. I wish it had only been two days. But it's certainly not a forever war, and Americans are glad to see us go on to the next page here.
COLLINS: OK. Senator Roger Marshall, we'll see what happens in 60 days, and have you back to join us, hopefully. Thank you for your time tonight.
MARSHALL: Thank you.
COLLINS: Up next here on THE SOURCE. President Trump says he knows who he will blame if this agreement with Iran falls apart.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming JD. You better be careful, JD.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:40:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PETER DOOCY, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, FOX NEWS CHANNEL: Why not stick around for the signing ceremony with this Iran peace deal?
TRUMP: I might.
DOOCY: You might?
TRUMP: Yes, I might. But I'd rather -- this is a memorandum of understanding. It's very important, but it might not be the kind of a document that I should be signing.
DOOCY: Is there some element to this where you send the Vice President. If it works out, great, you look like a genius for sending him. And if it doesn't work out, it's the Vice President's fault?
TRUMP: I like that idea, sure. Well, this way, if it works out, I'm going to take the credit. If it doesn't work out, I'm blaming JD. You better be careful, JD.
(LAUGHTER)
TRUMP: He's going to turn his plane around and get the hell out of here.
Yes, I like that idea, I think it's a good idea.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COLLINS: My political sources are here tonight. Jamal Simmons. And Ambassador Jeff Flake.
Ambassador, do you think the President was joking when he said that there?
JEFF FLAKE, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO TURKEY, (R) FORMER ARIZONA SENATOR: Only partly. I can tell you, Marco Rubio is living a charmed life, despite having defended this deal, coming up to it. Right now, it seems to be all on JD Vance. And so, yes, I think the President is only half-joking there. I think he'll look for a scapegoat when he needs to.
COLLINS: I mean, Jamal, as someone who worked for the former Vice President, and knows how they often get the worst assignments at times, and certainly I think Kamala Harris would agree with that. When you see this dynamic that's playing out with JD Vance, who is on a book tour, so he's been out there, defending this deal all over, in basically any kind of interview, what do you make of this dynamic that's playing out between him, the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who has not been as public-facing on the deal?
JAMAL SIMMONS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT TO PRES. BIDEN, FORMER COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR TO VP HARRIS: As they say in -- among my friends, ha-ha hell. The President meant what he said. I don't have any doubt that if this doesn't go well, he will put it on JD Vance.
Listen, if you're JD Vance, you're looking at this deal that he helped negotiate, or was a part of, Donald Trump has been promoting it. It's the three Ms. Iran gets to keep the three Ms. They get Missiles, they get Money, and they get to keep their nuclear Material. Those three Ms are things the President said they were not going to have, and they're going to get to keep them.
So, as I was talking to the House leadership office today, they're saying it's a complete -- it's a complete capitulation. You've got -- you've got statements from the Chair -- or the Ranking Members of Armed Services, Intel, and Foreign Affairs who want to get more information. They also think that the President has been completely contradicted from what he said earlier.
This is not popular on the left. It's not popular on the right. I'm not sure who else is for this, other than Donald Trump and Iran.
COLLINS: Ambassador Flake, though, on that front. There is a lot of criticism from people who are typically allies of this President, on the right. Ben Shapiro, Mark Levin--
FLAKE: Right.
[21:45:00]
COLLINS: --a lot of Republican lawmakers. Some of them were trying to put the blame on the Vice President, describing him as the architect of this deal.
But if the President puts his name on it, like he did tonight, does the President own this agreement?
FLAKE: Well, he should, yes. Certainly, JD didn't -- he's not the architect of it, although Lindsey Graham called him exactly that. So, what senators are saying, Republican senators, becomes perhaps more important than what the President says. You know, going into the next couple of years, the President isn't running for office again. Other senators are, and they'll look to distance themselves from it.
This is about as popular as the Anti-Weaponization Fund. I mean, this is really bad. I was around during the JCPOA. There was not one Republican vote for that. There wasn't a vote, technically for it, but there was a motion to proceed on the Iran Sanctions Relief Act, I think it was called, and not one Republican voted for it, precisely because it didn't deal with ballistic missiles, didn't deal with Iran's proxy forces. All it dealt with was the nuclear part, and Republicans said, That's not enough. So, I just can't see much support from the Republican side coming for this.
SIMMONS: Well, it's clear, Kaitlan that -- Kaitlan--
COLLINS: Jamal, I mean, as the President is headed back--
SIMMONS: Yes.
COLLINS: Yes, go ahead.
SIMMONS: Well, no, I was just going to say, it's clear the President, when he said earlier that he didn't want to be Herbert Hoover, that that is what's driving him. He got some sort of a briefing about what this was going to do economically, and he was willing to sign off on these three Ms, Money, Missiles, and nuclear Material for the Iranian regime.
FLAKE: I completely agree with Jamal on that--
COLLINS: Yes, I mean that Herbert Hoover comparison. For him--
FLAKE: Yes. Yes. That's driving it all.
COLLINS: Yes. I mean, Ambassador, for him to bring that up himself--
(CROSSTALK)
FLAKE: --this Strait open--
COLLINS: --it shows what's -- yes.
FLAKE: Yes, and it shows that we're completely over a barrel there. I mean, we've got no leverage, we have no cards, and so -- and this -- when you read this MOU, it smacks of that, that we really were in a very weak position, and this shows it.
And just, I mean, and the reason so many Republican senators and members of the House will be against this is they won't see it being implemented in the end. This calls for the lifting of all sanctions if you reach a deal in the end. That includes primary sanctions, some of them relate to Iran's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, that's not going away, it shouldn't go away, or other human rights sanctions that the Congress imposed, not the President. And so, I don't think Congress is going to lift them anytime soon.
COLLINS: Yes.
Ambassador Jeff Flake. Jamal Simmons. Great to have both of you here tonight.
We'll be right back with a new book on the Justice Department.
[21:50:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Tonight, CNN has learned that the acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, recently delivered a private speech to a conservative activist group that has pushed 2020 election conspiracy theories. Blanche told them, quote, "Your mission is not in conflict with the Department of Justice I lead. It is a mission the Department of Justice must share."
Joining me tonight is The New York Times reporter, Devlin Barrett, who is the author of the new book, "The Department of Revenge: How Trump Took Control of American Justice."
And congrats on the book. It's great to have you.
You spoke to sources who talked about how Blanche is going to view running the Justice Department, what that would look like. What do you make of what he said to this group about elections?
DEVLIN BARRETT, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES, AUTHOR, "THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENGE": I think you're seeing, in recent months, the head -- the leadership of the Justice Department, particularly Todd Blanche, talk more and more in line with what the President says about the 2020 election, about unverified, evidence-free claims of election fraud on a scale that just has not been found.
The Justice Department is moving to back up the President's accusations of election fraud, whether you're talking about California or other places, and that is -- that is part of the Justice Department's mission now.
COLLINS: I mean, you've obviously covered the DOJ, federal law enforcement, for two decades. The title of your book is obviously very telling, "The Department of Revenge." It's this deep dive into really how the DOJ has changed so much in Trump's second term.
When you were reporting on the case against Letitia James, for example, the New York Attorney General, you talk about something surprising about Blanche actually not -- not being in favor of doing that.
BARRETT: Right. There was a pretty critical meeting at the Justice Department, last summer, in which Todd Blanche made the argument that the evidence compiled by the FBI did not support charges against Letitia James.
But I think it's a really telling sign of who really calls the shots in the Justice Department, that even the Deputy Attorney General, and in many ways the most powerful person in the department, wasn't the final word on that, and the final word really came from the White House.
So, even when Todd Blanche made a presentation, and made an argument, as to why she should not be charged, that was overruled because, the White House wanted her charged, the President wanted her charged.
COLLINS: If you had to describe what it's like inside DOJ every day, what would you say?
BARRETT: I would say, for the career people who work there, morale is terrible. There is a great deal of people keeping their heads down to try to avoid getting a politically or ethically questionable assignment that could end their careers. A lot of people have been fired for not doing what they're told.
[21:55:00]
And in a department, like the Justice Department, which is not like the Department of Agriculture, which is not like the Department of Commerce, there are basic principles of justice and fairness involved. People are very worried about the direction the department's headed in.
COLLINS: Devlin Barrett.
The new book is "The Department of Revenge." Everyone should read it.
Thank you for joining us here tonight.
And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COLLINS: Knicks fans, specifically one named Michael Paulino (ph), have waited decades for this. Tomorrow, for the first time ever, the New York Knicks will ride down the Canyon of Heroes for their first ticker-tape parade. The celebrations don't stop there. That's because the Knicks' owner, James Dolan, says the team is going to be also going to the White House to commemorate their big win.
Tomorrow night, one of those fans will be right here on THE SOURCE. We'll bring you all the excitement from the parade with a very special fan. I promise, you are not going to want to miss it.
[22:00:00]
Thanks so much for joining us here tonight from Geneva.
"CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP" starts now.
ABBY PHILLIP, CNN HOST, CNN NEWSNIGHT WITH ABBY PHILLIP: Tonight. Donald Trump defends what many Republicans call, a surrender, the worst foreign policy blunder in decades--
