I read the MOU, and it is indeed broad in its scope. But the MOU is just that - a Memorandum of Understanding - not a "deal", but the framework for a final agreement (essentially, a term sheet). Am I wrong about that? Isn't that what the 60 days is all about? Criticizing the MOU might be pre-mature as the final deal has yet to be negotiated and inked.
Oh, it's a definitely a deal — a signed one describing what both sides have already agreed upon. One can certainly think of it as a 'framework' until a comprehensive final treaty has been completed that crosses all the t's and dot all the i's, but what it effectively is, is a concession list. And what the administration has conceded to the Iranians, at this starting point, is pretty much everything the beaten and bruised regime had been asking for. And some of it is effective immediately.
So no, I don't think it's premature at all to criticize it. Is it possible something will blow up the MOU, like Congress finding a way to derail it, or maybe Israel not agreeing to the conditions the Trump administration shadily accepted on their behalf? Yes, but there's no reason to think that the administration itself will leverage something much stronger after already giving up the store.
Hello SirJohn—- Here’s a thought: let us conservative Republicans give the Democrats what they’ve been clamoring for—-WE should IMPEACH Trump and beat them to the punch!
That would send a clear message to Vance and any other Republican that would even consider such a dumb A $$ agreement such as this!
Trump has come close to classic blunder #1 (Getting involved in a land war in Asia). Still, this may well be worth a dishonorable mention with The Vizzini Institute for Strategic Miscalculation!
I read the MOU, and it is indeed broad in its scope. But the MOU is just that - a Memorandum of Understanding - not a "deal", but the framework for a final agreement (essentially, a term sheet). Am I wrong about that? Isn't that what the 60 days is all about? Criticizing the MOU might be pre-mature as the final deal has yet to be negotiated and inked.
Oh, it's a definitely a deal — a signed one describing what both sides have already agreed upon. One can certainly think of it as a 'framework' until a comprehensive final treaty has been completed that crosses all the t's and dot all the i's, but what it effectively is, is a concession list. And what the administration has conceded to the Iranians, at this starting point, is pretty much everything the beaten and bruised regime had been asking for. And some of it is effective immediately.
So no, I don't think it's premature at all to criticize it. Is it possible something will blow up the MOU, like Congress finding a way to derail it, or maybe Israel not agreeing to the conditions the Trump administration shadily accepted on their behalf? Yes, but there's no reason to think that the administration itself will leverage something much stronger after already giving up the store.
It sounds like you've received "talking Points" from Hakeem Jeffries
It sounds like you believe whatever Jesse Watters tells you.
Do you think Trey Gowdy gets his talking points from Hakeem Jeffries? How about Gen. Jack Keane?
Try actually reading the MOU, then get back to me.
Hello SirJohn—- Here’s a thought: let us conservative Republicans give the Democrats what they’ve been clamoring for—-WE should IMPEACH Trump and beat them to the punch!
That would send a clear message to Vance and any other Republican that would even consider such a dumb A $$ agreement such as this!
Trump has come close to classic blunder #1 (Getting involved in a land war in Asia). Still, this may well be worth a dishonorable mention with The Vizzini Institute for Strategic Miscalculation!