A conservative columnist and staunch supporter of President Donald Trump argued on Tuesday that his fellow Republican “thinks we’re imbeciles.”
Read more GOP ex-governor: Trump today is ‘not the same’ as when he was lucid
“The most ridiculous nonsense (admittedly, there’s a lot of competition here) is that Iran has foresworn nuclear weapons,” conservative commentator Andrew C. McCarthy wrote for National Review on Tuesday. McCarthy, who dedicated his column to Trump’s prosecution of the Iran war, previously faulted him for not publicly releasing the terms of the memorandum of understanding (MOU), mischaracterizing it as a lasting peace and adding that if its terms flattered the administration, the public would learn about its terms by releasing it instead of “being spun about it.”
“Iran has always publicly foresworn nuclear weapons and emphasized that it is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),” McCarthy wrote. “That is what NPT members that aspire to nuclear weapons do. And as I recounted yesterday, just to make bigger fools out of us, Iran has also maintained that Ayatollah Khamenei even issued a fatwa against nukes (Khamenei was not qualified to issue fatwas, there wasn’t one in any event, and the regime zealously went about its nuclear weapons program even as it publicly claimed it neither wanted nor needed them).”
McCarthy also described it as “ridiculous” for Trump and his officials to claim Iran is not getting any US taxpayer money, since Iran will still be able to access funds “through sanctions relief and whatever cockamamie ‘investment fund’ the administration is conjuring. That the funds are not coming directly out of the U.S. treasury is beside the point.”
The conservative added that he is no fan of President Barack Obama’s deal with Iran in 2015, which was intended to stop their nuclear program while avoiding war. At the same time, he argued that Trump’s agreement has many of the same flaws Republicans disliked about its 2015 predecessor.
“If you’re serious about preventing the regime from developing nuclear weapons, then you (1) deny them the right to enrich and to have enrichment infrastructure; (2) remove the nine or ten bombs’ worth of enriched uranium they already have (or at least ensure that it is inaccessible); and (3) put in place a credible snap-inspection process,” McCarthy wrote. “That’s not on the table.”
Read more Aging Trump deliberately staging his ‘daily’ public shocks to hide this hard truth
“Am I wrong that this MOU is a disaster?” McCarthy asked. “Am I wrong that the administration is insulting our intelligence? There’s a sure way to find out: Publish the MOU.”
McCarthy is not alone among conservatives to blast Trump’s peace deal. On Tuesday The Wall Street Journal described it as doing nothing to address the reasons why Trump attacked Iran in the first place.
“Tehran says Hormuz won’t return to the status quo ante, and it claims it will charge ‘fees’ not tolls, as if that’s more than a semantic difference,” The Wall Street Journal argued. They also described it as worrisome that Trump’s deal “would defer most matters of the nuclear program to 60 more days of talks, with oil and other sanctions relief along the way in exchange for diplomatic progress. This linkage is crucial, but pushing off the most difficult nuclear issues in talks with ‘dishonorable people’ who don’t deal ‘in good faith,’ as the President called them on Friday, doesn’t inspire confidence. If the regime won’t agree to dismantle its nuclear program now, why would it do so after weeks of oil exports and other relief?”
Talk show host Mark Levin, another staunch Trump supporter, explained on Monday that he too strongly opposes Trump’s peace deal with Iran.
“I have asked for days, why can’t we, the people, see the damn [memorandum of understanding]?” Levin said. “Not through people briefed by an anonymous person. Honestly, I’ve never seen anything like this. If it is a great outcome for peace, then release it.”
Read more Yale historian calls on FBI agents to refuse assisting in Trump schemes
