“To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent,” 44 said in his first inaugural address, “know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.”
Cutting an ungood new clear deal with Iran's Preacher Command just for the sake of cutting a new clear deal?
Repudiated, isolated, ineffective, stymied, 44 cannot persuade the Iranians of the strength of the American position. So he will move as far as he can in the direction of the Iranian one.
Unable to make Iran pro-American, he will settle for making America pro-Iranian. It is part of his dismal, pathetic, ill-considered, shortsighted, and injurious “legacy.”
For six years the White House has been careful not to provide the Iranians with any reason to reject negotiations, to prevent his fantasy from becoming real. To the contrary: It has been solicitous of Iran and Syria, in a demonstration of its willingness to address their grievances.
That is why Democrats called Bashar al-Assad a reformer, why 44 remained silent during the 2009 protests over Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s rigged election, why the State Department doesn’t include human rights or ballistic missiles in the scope of its negotiations with Iran. It is why 44 has resisted overthrowing Assad even after he crossed the red line of chemical-weapons use, why he refers to the “Islamic republic of Iran,” bestowing legitimacy on the revolutionary regime, and why administration officials reject congressional proposals to reinstate sanctions should the negotiations with Iran fail.
These decisions are not made in light of the national-security interests of the United States. They are made to keep alive 44’s dream of peace with Iran. And the purpose of these decisions isn’t to mollify American politicians.
It’s to satisfy Iranian ones.
Pic - "By neglecting the even more deadly peril from an Iranian nuke and allowing Tehran to think they have nothing to lose by stiffing the West in the talks, 44 is endangering U.S. security and setting himself up for a legacy of foreign policy catastrophe."