Transcripts For CSPAN U.S. Special Rep. For Iran At Senate F

Mr. Hook the departments acting Legal Advisory acting Legal Advisor testified before this committee. I have nothing new to add beyond what he said. Id for to his answers. I defer to him for his answers. But we are not looking for military conflict with iran. The troop enhanced posture with saudi is purely defensive to help saudi arabia defend itself. Im not so sure iran sees it that way when we take sides like we have. How many times have you met with President Trumps personal attorney Rudy Giuliani about any topic of Foreign Policy, and what topics did you discuss . Mr. Hook when i directed the office of legal policy, i am ends with michael mu Casey Michael mukasey, and he asked for a meeting when i was in legal policy, and he brought Rudy Giuliani to the meeting with him. Meetings were regarding a counselor issue. There was no action taken regarding the meeting topic. Senator and that is the only meeting you had with him . Methook general mukasey with ami met with me twice and Rudy Giuliani was at both meetings. Same topic. Senator are you confirming the meeting about the zarab case . Mr. Hook it is a consular issue. We dont discuss consular issues. Senator you are confirming the Washington Post reporting that you met with mr. Giuliani in 2017 when he was representing zareb, a Turkish National convicted of helping turkish figures make large amounts of money evading iranian sanctions. Was it appropriate for mr. Giuliani to press for president ial intervention in an ongoing criminal trial to free and iranian sanction invader to avoid testimony that would implicate powerful figures in turkey . What actions did you take after that meeting in response . Mr. Hook it was a meeting at the request of judge mukasey, and there was no action taken after either meeting. Senator can you confirm you only met with mr. Giuliani twice . Mr. Hook correct. But it was a meeting at the request of judge mukasey, he was attorney general, doj in the bush administration, i served in the justice department. I have known him for a number of years auntie requested the meeting. That is the nature of the meeting, i want to make that clear. Senator you said to meetings meetings, about the same subject as reported by the Washington Post. I stated the basis of it and you confirmed it. Mr. Hook i said it was involving a consular issue. We dont discuss consular issues. I confirmed i met at the request of judge mukasey twice, he requested the meeting to discuss a consular issue. Issuer and the consular concerned the Turkish National . Mr. Hook i dont have any comment about the nature of the meeting. Atator can you not confirm all what the Washington Post reported . Mr. Hook i cant confirm something i havent read. Senator Inspector General and state Department Emails show you have been working to retaliate against state Department Employees whom you do not believe are sufficiently loyal to President Trump. There are reports you wrote yourself and email with a list of individuals you consider insufficiently loyal, or room you listed as troublemakers or turncoats. Furthermore, you have reportedly received communications from private citizens, such as Newt Gingrich and others in the republican party, to justify firing our reassigning career officials. We have a Civil Service system to protect this sort of politicization of our government, especially diplomats. Herbal who was urging you to take action against Career State Department officials . All, ik so first of cant comment on an ig investigation. I look forward to that report. I think what you are quoting from is from something that was leaked, so i dont have any comment on something that was leaked. So we will wait for the report to come out. It is not proper for me to comment on it. But i will say that as director of policy planning, and in my current role as director of the iran action group, i have worked closely and very well with all members of the career Civil Service, the foreign service, political appointees, all manner of scheduled appointments in the federal government, and im very proud of the work we have done together. Supporterbio im a of the administrations policy towards iran. I also believe you are knowledge knowledgeable about the topic and doing a good job, but you have a very tough job. Not expecting to be able you to be able to do that job i say,ne on everything but i do have to challenge that anddecision on the kurds the turkish incursion into syria, iran is carrying out a counter Pressure Campaign that allows them to conduct attacks in the region with enough deniability to avoid international condemnation. It is a capacity they have built partially with funds generated by the disastrous iran deal. The evidence is clear that the threshold they think they can get away with on some of these attacks is greatly influenced by their perception that the administration is looking to get out of the middle east and not engage in some conflict. I do not believe, although i understand the difficulty of the job you have, that it is credible to argue the decision with regards to turkey doesnt fortify that iranian perception. It is difficult to ignore the implications of that decision on our partners in the region, and their views on our security assurances, whether it is israel, jordan, the uae or saudi arabia. Frankly, beyond the middle east, it is not difficult to argue other countries dont see that decision and see themselves there one day in a moment of conflict and crisis. I dont expect you can opine on it, those are my views and i feel strongly and i suspect many others do as well. If there any if there is anything you said that i if there is anything i said you disagree with, i would be happy to listen. The security counsel revised the embargo on conventional weapons in iran on things like large caliber artillery combat aircraft and the like large caliber artillery, combat aircraft and the like. September, an opinion piece in the wall street journal argued the u. S. Should trigger 2231 and the mechanisms there for snapping back u. N. Sanctions against iran in preserving the arms embargo and missile and. The snapback would go into effect unless the Un Security Council adopts a rub is adopts a resolution to the contrary, which would be subject to american veto. The oped said some might argue that since the u. S. Withdrew from the jcpoa, it is no longer a participant and cannot argue this, but it includes the u. S. Without qualification. Do you agree with the assessment that the u. S. Could trigger the snapback mechanism regardless of whether the u. S. Is observing the nonlegally binding deal . I think we need to have lawyers from the nsc and state department and other agencies look at this question. The broad procedure to force snapback is, a member of the deal would go to the Un Security Council, the Council President would table a resolution introduced by the member, and the member that introduced it would then veto his own resolution and that would then end the Iran Nuclear Deal. The question you raised is who has standing to initiate that sequence of events that leads to the Iran Nuclear Deal and the snapback of the u. N. Sanctions. You haveis, since asked, and i have talked to staff on the Senate Foreign relations committee, this is a question you would like to have answered and i will take it back and work with the interagency to come up with an answer. Rubio in july i raised the problem of chinese individuals and entities helping the Iranian Regime export oil in violation of the sanctions. Thes pleased to see secretary of state announced sanctions against the chinese firm for purchasing oil from iran contrary to u. S. Sections. Without getting ahead of ourselves and alerting people, are there other such actors out there available for us to go after . Is there more to do in this space with regards to entities, chinese or otherwise . For raisingank you what we have done to enforce sanctions, especially oil sanctions, because that is the chief source of irans export revenue. We have now sanctioned chinese inpany a Chinese Company july, and in midseptember we sanctioned six chinese entities that were importing iranian crude oil. All the oil waivers ended six months after we left the deal, so we have said we will sanction any sanctionable activity. We also sanctioned five chinese , icutives in these firms have met with the chinese to talk about this. Historicallya is irans biggest importer, so it is important that its largest importer not import crude oil. The argument i made to the chinese is that, you would like to see greater space Greater Peace and stability in the middle east, and for as long as iran is able to sell oil came a they are going to cell oil ll oil, they are going to use that oil to fund unrest. Oil is not an exotic grade. We have a well supplied market. There has been no disruption of Chinese Energy needs during this period, so there is no need for them to be importing iranian crude oil. Senator murphy mr. Hook, the reason senator udall is asking about Rudy Giulianis request on behalf of the turkish businessman, it is twofold. Number one, we are very concerned there is a shadow Foreign Policy operation that exists, being conducted by the president s personal lawyer, a representative of his political interests. We know that because we have transcripts of phone calls in which the president tells foreign leaders not to call your boss, secretary of palm secretary pompeo, but to call Rudy Giuliani. But we are concerned about this case because it seems as if it is evidence that the president s personal lawyer, his shadow secretary of state, is working to undermine american sanctions against iran, the very sanctions you testify to us are crippling their economy. Udallssk senator question in a different way. Have you spoken to Rudy Giuliani about u. S. Sanctions policy zarab. His client, reza mr. Hook the meeting was a couple of years ago. I was listening. As i said, judge mukasey organize the meeting, i listened and there was no action taken. Murphy but you did have a meeting with Rudy Giuliani regarding a client to wanted to get out of sanctions . Mr. Hook i had a meeting with judge mukasey, he raised a consular issue with me and there was no action taken. Senator murphy there is a report from three people familiar with a meeting with President Trump and secretary tillerson, who you were working for as perhaps his closest advisor, and which President Trump asked for secretary tillersons help in working to drop the case against zarab. Are you familiar with the meeting . Mr. Hook i was not familiar with the meeting. Chairman, ity mr. Is important to set the record straight with respect to some things mr. Hook has said about our policy visavis iran and its connection to developments in syria. I appreciate that you have a tough job and i dont imagine you would have given counsel to the president to abandon our kurdish partners in syria, but it is simply not credible to say that we didnt have a counter iran element to our syria strategy. Multiple individuals testified to that before this committee and would still testify to that. It is not credible to say abandoning the kurds doesnt irane the efficacy of our strategy. Iran absolutely benefits, unequivocally, from a new alignment inside syria, in which the kurds are forced to align themselves with bashir al assad. And it is not credible and doesnt pass the straight face test to try to convince us that europe is helping us with a maximum Pressure Campaign on iran. To the extent i have a question on these topics, i will give you one to try to clarify the record. You have this list of actions that europe as taken, but lets be honest. Europe is attempting to work around our sanctions. Europe is trying to create financial vehicles so there businesses can continue to trade with iran. They are talking about an of credit to prop up the iranian economy. They are talking about a new the of credit to prop up iranian economy. It doesnt pass the laugh test to say the europeans are working with us. I your billing trying are you really trying to convince us the europeans are assisting in our maximum Pressure Campaign, when we know they are actively engaged in trying to help their businesses work around u. S. Sanctions . Mr. Hook so you said europe is working around our sanctions. To be more precise, europe, European Companies is what we are talking about. European companies have made a clear choice to choose the United States market over the iranian market. The eu does more trade with kazakhstan than with iran. It is not even in the top 30 of trading partners. So we have seen nothing but full compliance by European Companies on our sanctions regime. European governments are frustrated iran has lost some of the benefits under the Iran Nuclear Deal with our departure, but that is a secondary consequence. As it pertains to European Countries European Companies, there is no daylight. There is more daylight between European Companies and european governments then with the u. S. Anator murphy you sent us list of action that European Companies have been taking. Its a stretch to say you have had success convincing nations in europe to join the Pressure Campaign. The Pressure Campaign is unilateral, not as effective as it could be if you were successful. Mr. Hook our unilateral sanctions have been much more effective than multilateral sanctions that were in effect before the deal. Indisputable. Andwhen you say it is true, maybe this is a matter of just making distinctions, there is our Pressure Campaign and then there is europe working to confront and address iranian threats to peace and security. And sometimes those overlap, and sometimes they separate, but when i look at this list of european actions, it is dozens of actions, everything from statements, austria, belgium, france and germany exposed in annian plot to bomb opposition politician and arrested several iranians. The netherlands arrested several iranian diplomats in connection with an assassination. The French Foreign minister condemned iran. Serbia wrote revoked visa free travel for iranian citizens. I would welcome you reading this. Europe has done a lot in the time that we have left the deal, to try to raise the cost of iranian aggression. They have not joined our maximum Pressure Campaign, but have adopted our position that we need a new deal. Boris johnson said the Iran Nuclear Deal was a bad deal. Senator murphy the proof is in the pudding. Iran is not at the negotiating table. You have a year left on your term. Their level of activity in the region is worse than ever before. If you had evidence all these actions were bringing them to the table, we might be having a different conversation, but there is no evidence this has gotten us to appoint where you can effectuate a negotiated settlement, and you only have 12 months on the term. We are not going to get the agreement you have sought with the time we have left. Chairman risch im not complaining about the time because this is an important discussion. Im listening and im hoping we are not talking past each other. Europeans, wethe know what their view is on this. They are despond didnt over the fact we walked away from the jcpoa, but on a transactional basis they have certainly done some things to help us move the ball forward. They have also done some things to get around us by establishing credit and what have you, but the debate should be, and apparently we disagree, that the sanctions that have been put in place indeed are causing great difficulty within iran. Has it gotten them to the table . No. Are there indications of them coming to the table . No. Where do you suggest we go . Back to the jcpoa . Do we beg them to come to the table . Im not trying to rankle anybody, i think we need to pull together as far as iran is concerned. I just hope we are not talking past each other on this. Senator murphy there is evidence today that you are crippling the economy. That is supposed to be leverage to get them to the table to negotiate a deal that was better than the jcpoa. Many of us would argue you are never going to get them to agree to something that is better than the jcpoa, but you cant even get them to the table because they see europe as a lifeline, the ability to work around our sanctions through lines of credit and financial vehicles from europe. I just dont think we should let the administration get away with telling is europe is our partner in trying to get iran to the negotiating table. They are not. They are trunk to work around the sanctions the Trump Administration has enacted. Trying to work around the sanctions the Legal Advisor<\/a>y acting Legal Advisor<\/a> testified before this committee. I have nothing new to add beyond what he said. Id for to his answers. I defer to him for his answers. But we are not looking for military conflict with iran. The troop enhanced posture with saudi is purely defensive to help saudi arabia defend itself. Im not so sure iran sees it that way when we take sides like we have. How many times have you met with President Trump<\/a>s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani<\/a> about any topic of Foreign Policy<\/a>, and what topics did you discuss . Mr. Hook when i directed the office of legal policy, i am ends with michael mu Casey Michael<\/a> mukasey, and he asked for a meeting when i was in legal policy, and he brought Rudy Giuliani<\/a> to the meeting with him. Meetings were regarding a counselor issue. There was no action taken regarding the meeting topic. Senator and that is the only meeting you had with him . Methook general mukasey with ami met with me twice and Rudy Giuliani<\/a> was at both meetings. Same topic. Senator are you confirming the meeting about the zarab case . Mr. Hook it is a consular issue. We dont discuss consular issues. Senator you are confirming the Washington Post<\/a> reporting that you met with mr. Giuliani in 2017 when he was representing zareb, a Turkish National<\/a> convicted of helping turkish figures make large amounts of money evading iranian sanctions. Was it appropriate for mr. Giuliani to press for president ial intervention in an ongoing criminal trial to free and iranian sanction invader to avoid testimony that would implicate powerful figures in turkey . What actions did you take after that meeting in response . Mr. Hook it was a meeting at the request of judge mukasey, and there was no action taken after either meeting. Senator can you confirm you only met with mr. Giuliani twice . Mr. Hook correct. But it was a meeting at the request of judge mukasey, he was attorney general, doj in the bush administration, i served in the justice department. I have known him for a number of years auntie requested the meeting. That is the nature of the meeting, i want to make that clear. Senator you said to meetings meetings, about the same subject as reported by the Washington Post<\/a>. I stated the basis of it and you confirmed it. Mr. Hook i said it was involving a consular issue. We dont discuss consular issues. I confirmed i met at the request of judge mukasey twice, he requested the meeting to discuss a consular issue. Issuer and the consular concerned the Turkish National<\/a> . Mr. Hook i dont have any comment about the nature of the meeting. Atator can you not confirm all what the Washington Post<\/a> reported . Mr. Hook i cant confirm something i havent read. Senator Inspector General<\/a> and state Department Emails<\/a> show you have been working to retaliate against state Department Employees<\/a> whom you do not believe are sufficiently loyal to President Trump<\/a>. There are reports you wrote yourself and email with a list of individuals you consider insufficiently loyal, or room you listed as troublemakers or turncoats. Furthermore, you have reportedly received communications from private citizens, such as Newt Gingrich<\/a> and others in the republican party, to justify firing our reassigning career officials. We have a Civil Service<\/a> system to protect this sort of politicization of our government, especially diplomats. Herbal who was urging you to take action against Career State Department<\/a> officials . All, ik so first of cant comment on an ig investigation. I look forward to that report. I think what you are quoting from is from something that was leaked, so i dont have any comment on something that was leaked. So we will wait for the report to come out. It is not proper for me to comment on it. But i will say that as director of policy planning, and in my current role as director of the iran action group, i have worked closely and very well with all members of the career Civil Service<\/a>, the foreign service, political appointees, all manner of scheduled appointments in the federal government, and im very proud of the work we have done together. Supporterbio im a of the administrations policy towards iran. I also believe you are knowledge knowledgeable about the topic and doing a good job, but you have a very tough job. Not expecting to be able you to be able to do that job i say,ne on everything but i do have to challenge that anddecision on the kurds the turkish incursion into syria, iran is carrying out a counter Pressure Campaign<\/a> that allows them to conduct attacks in the region with enough deniability to avoid international condemnation. It is a capacity they have built partially with funds generated by the disastrous iran deal. The evidence is clear that the threshold they think they can get away with on some of these attacks is greatly influenced by their perception that the administration is looking to get out of the middle east and not engage in some conflict. I do not believe, although i understand the difficulty of the job you have, that it is credible to argue the decision with regards to turkey doesnt fortify that iranian perception. It is difficult to ignore the implications of that decision on our partners in the region, and their views on our security assurances, whether it is israel, jordan, the uae or saudi arabia. Frankly, beyond the middle east, it is not difficult to argue other countries dont see that decision and see themselves there one day in a moment of conflict and crisis. I dont expect you can opine on it, those are my views and i feel strongly and i suspect many others do as well. If there any if there is anything you said that i if there is anything i said you disagree with, i would be happy to listen. The security counsel revised the embargo on conventional weapons in iran on things like large caliber artillery combat aircraft and the like large caliber artillery, combat aircraft and the like. September, an opinion piece in the wall street journal argued the u. S. Should trigger 2231 and the mechanisms there for snapping back u. N. Sanctions against iran in preserving the arms embargo and missile and. The snapback would go into effect unless the Un Security Council<\/a> adopts a rub is adopts a resolution to the contrary, which would be subject to american veto. The oped said some might argue that since the u. S. Withdrew from the jcpoa, it is no longer a participant and cannot argue this, but it includes the u. S. Without qualification. Do you agree with the assessment that the u. S. Could trigger the snapback mechanism regardless of whether the u. S. Is observing the nonlegally binding deal . I think we need to have lawyers from the nsc and state department and other agencies look at this question. The broad procedure to force snapback is, a member of the deal would go to the Un Security Council<\/a>, the Council President<\/a> would table a resolution introduced by the member, and the member that introduced it would then veto his own resolution and that would then end the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a>. The question you raised is who has standing to initiate that sequence of events that leads to the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> and the snapback of the u. N. Sanctions. You haveis, since asked, and i have talked to staff on the Senate Foreign<\/a> relations committee, this is a question you would like to have answered and i will take it back and work with the interagency to come up with an answer. Rubio in july i raised the problem of chinese individuals and entities helping the Iranian Regime<\/a> export oil in violation of the sanctions. Thes pleased to see secretary of state announced sanctions against the chinese firm for purchasing oil from iran contrary to u. S. Sections. Without getting ahead of ourselves and alerting people, are there other such actors out there available for us to go after . Is there more to do in this space with regards to entities, chinese or otherwise . For raisingank you what we have done to enforce sanctions, especially oil sanctions, because that is the chief source of irans export revenue. We have now sanctioned chinese inpany a Chinese Company<\/a> july, and in midseptember we sanctioned six chinese entities that were importing iranian crude oil. All the oil waivers ended six months after we left the deal, so we have said we will sanction any sanctionable activity. We also sanctioned five chinese , icutives in these firms have met with the chinese to talk about this. Historicallya is irans biggest importer, so it is important that its largest importer not import crude oil. The argument i made to the chinese is that, you would like to see greater space Greater Peace<\/a> and stability in the middle east, and for as long as iran is able to sell oil came a they are going to cell oil ll oil, they are going to use that oil to fund unrest. Oil is not an exotic grade. We have a well supplied market. There has been no disruption of Chinese Energy<\/a> needs during this period, so there is no need for them to be importing iranian crude oil. Senator murphy mr. Hook, the reason senator udall is asking about Rudy Giuliani<\/a>s request on behalf of the turkish businessman, it is twofold. Number one, we are very concerned there is a shadow Foreign Policy<\/a> operation that exists, being conducted by the president s personal lawyer, a representative of his political interests. We know that because we have transcripts of phone calls in which the president tells foreign leaders not to call your boss, secretary of palm secretary pompeo, but to call Rudy Giuliani<\/a>. But we are concerned about this case because it seems as if it is evidence that the president s personal lawyer, his shadow secretary of state, is working to undermine american sanctions against iran, the very sanctions you testify to us are crippling their economy. Udallssk senator question in a different way. Have you spoken to Rudy Giuliani<\/a> about u. S. Sanctions policy zarab. His client, reza mr. Hook the meeting was a couple of years ago. I was listening. As i said, judge mukasey organize the meeting, i listened and there was no action taken. Murphy but you did have a meeting with Rudy Giuliani<\/a> regarding a client to wanted to get out of sanctions . Mr. Hook i had a meeting with judge mukasey, he raised a consular issue with me and there was no action taken. Senator murphy there is a report from three people familiar with a meeting with President Trump<\/a> and secretary tillerson, who you were working for as perhaps his closest advisor, and which President Trump<\/a> asked for secretary tillersons help in working to drop the case against zarab. Are you familiar with the meeting . Mr. Hook i was not familiar with the meeting. Chairman, ity mr. Is important to set the record straight with respect to some things mr. Hook has said about our policy visavis iran and its connection to developments in syria. I appreciate that you have a tough job and i dont imagine you would have given counsel to the president to abandon our kurdish partners in syria, but it is simply not credible to say that we didnt have a counter iran element to our syria strategy. Multiple individuals testified to that before this committee and would still testify to that. It is not credible to say abandoning the kurds doesnt irane the efficacy of our strategy. Iran absolutely benefits, unequivocally, from a new alignment inside syria, in which the kurds are forced to align themselves with bashir al assad. And it is not credible and doesnt pass the straight face test to try to convince us that europe is helping us with a maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a> on iran. To the extent i have a question on these topics, i will give you one to try to clarify the record. You have this list of actions that europe as taken, but lets be honest. Europe is attempting to work around our sanctions. Europe is trying to create financial vehicles so there businesses can continue to trade with iran. They are talking about an of credit to prop up the iranian economy. They are talking about a new the of credit to prop up iranian economy. It doesnt pass the laugh test to say the europeans are working with us. I your billing trying are you really trying to convince us the europeans are assisting in our maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a>, when we know they are actively engaged in trying to help their businesses work around u. S. Sanctions . Mr. Hook so you said europe is working around our sanctions. To be more precise, europe, European Companies<\/a> is what we are talking about. European companies have made a clear choice to choose the United States<\/a> market over the iranian market. The eu does more trade with kazakhstan than with iran. It is not even in the top 30 of trading partners. So we have seen nothing but full compliance by European Companies<\/a> on our sanctions regime. European governments are frustrated iran has lost some of the benefits under the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> with our departure, but that is a secondary consequence. As it pertains to European Countries<\/a> European Companies<\/a>, there is no daylight. There is more daylight between European Companies<\/a> and european governments then with the u. S. Anator murphy you sent us list of action that European Companies<\/a> have been taking. Its a stretch to say you have had success convincing nations in europe to join the Pressure Campaign<\/a>. The Pressure Campaign<\/a> is unilateral, not as effective as it could be if you were successful. Mr. Hook our unilateral sanctions have been much more effective than multilateral sanctions that were in effect before the deal. Indisputable. Andwhen you say it is true, maybe this is a matter of just making distinctions, there is our Pressure Campaign<\/a> and then there is europe working to confront and address iranian threats to peace and security. And sometimes those overlap, and sometimes they separate, but when i look at this list of european actions, it is dozens of actions, everything from statements, austria, belgium, france and germany exposed in annian plot to bomb opposition politician and arrested several iranians. The netherlands arrested several iranian diplomats in connection with an assassination. The French Foreign<\/a> minister condemned iran. Serbia wrote revoked visa free travel for iranian citizens. I would welcome you reading this. Europe has done a lot in the time that we have left the deal, to try to raise the cost of iranian aggression. They have not joined our maximum Pressure Campaign<\/a>, but have adopted our position that we need a new deal. Boris johnson said the Iran Nuclear Deal<\/a> was a bad deal. Senator murphy the proof is in the pudding. Iran is not at the negotiating table. You have a year left on your term. Their level of activity in the region is worse than ever before. If you had evidence all these actions were bringing them to the table, we might be having a different conversation, but there is no evidence this has gotten us to appoint where you can effectuate a negotiated settlement, and you only have 12 months on the term. We are not going to get the agreement you have sought with the time we have left. Chairman risch im not complaining about the time because this is an important discussion. Im listening and im hoping we are not talking past each other. Europeans, wethe know what their view is on this. They are despond didnt over the fact we walked away from the jcpoa, but on a transactional basis they have certainly done some things to help us move the ball forward. They have also done some things to get around us by establishing credit and what have you, but the debate should be, and apparently we disagree, that the sanctions that have been put in place indeed are causing great difficulty within iran. Has it gotten them to the table . No. Are there indications of them coming to the table . No. Where do you suggest we go . Back to the jcpoa . Do we beg them to come to the table . Im not trying to rankle anybody, i think we need to pull together as far as iran is concerned. I just hope we are not talking past each other on this. Senator murphy there is evidence today that you are crippling the economy. That is supposed to be leverage to get them to the table to negotiate a deal that was better than the jcpoa. Many of us would argue you are never going to get them to agree to something that is better than the jcpoa, but you cant even get them to the table because they see europe as a lifeline, the ability to work around our sanctions through lines of credit and financial vehicles from europe. I just dont think we should let the administration get away with telling is europe is our partner in trying to get iran to the negotiating table. They are not. They are trunk to work around the sanctions the Trump Administration<\/a> has enacted. Trying to work around the sanctions the Trump Administration<\/a> has enacted. That is the primary reason this strategy hasnt worked for three years and is not going to work. That is a fair opinion. I would disagree, but the point about sitting it out until trumps term is over it may be good, but they have a tough year ahead of them. They have 14 months ahead of them of some pretty dark times, if you accept what is happening particularly iran, with the depreciation of their currency and that sort of thing. That is a fair opinion you have, we just have a fair disagreement. With that, we have to go vote, so we will do that and come back. We are anxious to hear from senator markey and senator cruz, our last questioners. If we can have a short break, go vote, and we will all come back. Fair enough. [gavel striking block] [gavel striking block","publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"archive.org","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","width":"800","height":"600","url":"\/\/ia801004.us.archive.org\/34\/items\/CSPAN_20191020_173900_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_2\/CSPAN_20191020_173900_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_2.thumbs\/CSPAN_20191020_173900_U.S._Special_Rep._for_Iran_at_Senate_Foreign_Relations_Committee_-_Part_2_000001.jpg"}},"autauthor":{"@type":"Organization"},"author":{"sameAs":"archive.org","name":"archive.org"}}],"coverageEndTime":"20240716T12:35:10+00:00"}