Donald

[Neil Stone @DrNeilStone]

Surrender document being signed at Versailles

1919 2026

[Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow]

MORE ON THE MOU ...

This is the second part of my comments regarding the MOU. I post the first part this morning.

President Trump ordered this military operation to prevent Iran from getting and using nuclear weapons. And the early days of this war was a spectacular success. For some reason, an ceasefire was quickly ordered, and it lasted for over 2-months, despite the scores of violations by Iran and Hezbollah. Great damage has been done to Iran's military. And the president deserves enormous credit for having the courage to do what no other president did before him. My fear is that no other president after him will have the same courage to act should the terms of any agreement be violated.

The president ordered a 2-day return to military operations when the Iranian regime was dragging its feet. That was quickly ended on a promise by the regime that it would sign on to an MOU.

From day one, I have underscored that no deal will be honored by the Iranian regime. Its political-theocratic ideology fuels a revolution that compels the catastrophic destruction of the West. Presumably, the president knew this as he repeatedly warned it Iran got a nuclear weapon, it would use it against us. Moreover, Iran's pattern of conduct over the last 47-years makes clear that it uses negotiations as a tactic to further its aims. Yet, we abandoned the military destruction of Iran and did not use all of our capabilities to destroy the regime, including not arming the Iranian people due, in part to polling and gas prices. To be clear, there was never a plan to use ground forces or be involved in a "forever war." Indeed, in my view, if the MOU is not drastically altered during the 60-day negotiation period, a forever war -- a continuation of Iran's war on the West -- is not in doubt.

So, what does this MOU involve? I am working from the closest draft of the MOU publicly available, which I believe is fundamentally accurate.

Item 1. Upon the signing of the MOU there is an immediate and permanent end to the war, and that specifically includes Lebanon.

This doesn't even make any sense. There are 60-days (or more) to negotiate a deal. Therefore, before a deal is finalized, we just declared a cessation of military action -- permanently. And we committed to not even threatening force. Why would we agree to immediately drop the most important leverage we have over the regime in advance of it complying with MOU requirements and whatever else is decided in 60-days?

On top of this, we do the unthinkable. We capitulate to Iran's demand to protect Hezbollah. As I explained earlier: Hezbollah, which has brutally murdered hundreds of our fellow citizens, is essentially protected by our government in alliance with the Iranian regime, and free to continue to kill Americans, Israelis, and others as the most potent terror weapon of the Iranian regime not only survives but is immunized. And since Israel is the only country that actually fights this enemy with its soldiers and airmen, and whose citizens are in the direct line of fire from missile and drone attacks, nobody in their right mind will tolerate this. No amount of berating our ally or pressuring the PM, which is shocking, changes anything. I want to underscore Hezbollah has killed our people and we've done next to nothing to deal with it. In and of itself, that is shameful. Israel must not and will not adhere to such an egregious capitulation.

Item 2. We refrain from interfering in Iran's sovereignty and they will not interfere with ours. Who believes Iran won't interfere with our internal affairs. We spend tens of billions on counterterrorism against, among others, Iran. Does anyone believe Iran will drop out of its axis with China, Russia, and North Korea? And how do we enforce any deal against these other countries. And if we catch them, then what?

Item 4. We lift the naval blockade 30-days after the MOU, rather than after final negotiations for a deal. That removes another major leverage we have over the regime. And we agree to remove our forces around that area within 30-days after the final agreement. We can always send our forces back, they say. But in all likelihood, we would not.

Item 6. Incredibly, we commit to helping create a comprehensive plan for the rehabilitation and economic development of Iran, while ensuring financing of at least $300 billion. We are told it will not involve any of our tax money. That's a shiny object. Who would have dreamt that after we went to war with this regime because it was within days of having a nuclear weapon, that we would have any role in helping coordinate or raise one dime for this regime. The VP says they don't a dime if they don't meet certain conditions. That's not what it says. Moreover, let's say they meet all conditions, receive the billions, and then tell us to go to hell. And who among us believe any of this money will go to assisting or improving the lives of the Iranian people, who have no rights and are slaughtered by the tens of thousands? In fact, as I write this, they're executing innocent young people. Honestly, this is too absurd to comprehend. It was clearly proposed in lieu of the regime's demand for reparations, which should have been dismissed out of hand.

Regardless of how this slush fund is collected or distributed, here we are committing to helping reconstruct the terror regime we presumably just destroyed. Besides, I thought we hit military structures and targets, not civilian locations.

Item 7. Get this -- we commit, as a nation, to not only lifting all sanctions we have on the regime, but we commit to helping lift all other sanctions, including by the UN, the IAEA, and all other primary and secondary sanctions, on Iran. So, we are now working in the service of the regime with other countries and before international organizations in this regard.

Item 8. "[Iran] reiterates that it will never produce nuclear weapons." We "have agreed that the fate of enriched material and the fate of all other mutually agreed nuclear-related issues, including Iran's nuclear needs, will be ..." dealt with in the final issue. Shouldn't this issue have been the first item on this list? That said, this actually says nothing. All the relief and other commitments, some which is immediate or in 30-days, comes before any serious effort to lay out with details and specifics the manner in which nuclear program will be permanently ended and enriched uranium will be destroyed? Now they're talking about degrading the uranium? This was supposed to be the core of everything. At best, it does not go beyond broad slogans.

Item 9. We agree not to strengthen our forces in the region pending a final agreement, and we agree not to impose any new sanctions on Iran -- thereby surrendering yet more leverage over the regime.

Item 10. As I go through the points, I just keep shaking my head. Here, with the signing of the MOU, we agree to immediately issue waivers of exports of Iranian crude oil, petro products, all related services, banking, insurance, transportation, and the like. In other words, the Iranian regime is back in business -- immediately. Before any final deal. Billions and billions will now flow into the regime.

Item 11. In addition, "frozen or restricted funds and assets of [Iran] will be released and made fully available. ... " Again, billions more will be flowing into the regime -- immediately.

What is not in this arrangement:

1. Not a word about ballistic missiles, the single most destructive weapon Iran has and has used, and which have the capability of killing tens of thousands and destroying cities if launched in a wave. This is a grave capitulation to the regime.

2. Not a word about promoting and funding terrorism and terror groups. I've no illusions the regime's terrorism and terror-funding will not be curtailed under any circumstances.

3. Not a word about the Iranian people, who we promised to help at the outset. Apparently, they've been abandoned.

4. Not a word about the regime paying reparations to our country, Israel, or the Arab countries for the massive damage cause by their ballistic missiles and other missiles.

AGAIN, DURING THE NEXT 60-DAYS THIS MOU REQUIRES SERIOUS CHANGES IF NOT OUTRIGHT ABANDONMENT.

MORE THOUGHTS LATER

[Mike Pence @Mike_Pence]

President Trump deserves great credit for making a decision for the first time in modern history to unleash the armed forces of the United States against Iran last year and this year…

But I do have very real concerns about the MOU now that we see what’s In it and also what’s Not In It.

This MOU with Iran does smack of the kind of appeasement that our administration rejected in the Obama-Iran nuclear deal and also when Joe Biden attempted to return to the politics of appeasement during his administration.

I would urge the President to take a step back, continue the blockade and pursue a negotiated settlement that commits Iran to dismantling their nuclear program, dismantling this missile program, ends support for terrorist proxies and opens the strait. Failing that, we should let our Armed Forces finish the job on our terms.

[Mike Pence @Mike_Pence]

According to language that has been reported about MOU with Iran, there is:

🔴 NO mention of dismantling the nuclear program or the ballistic missile program.

🔴 NO commitment to ending support for Hamas, Hezbollah, or other terrorist organizations

But remarkably, the MOU with Iran reportedly includes:

🔴Immediate sanctions relief from the moment the MOU is signed. This means $3 BILLION a month into the coffers of Iran.

🔴A pledge of $100 billion in Iranian frozen assets being freed up based only on “progress” in negotiations

🔴The U.S. & others to arrange for a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran.

The reported MOU with Iran smacks of the kind of appeasement that we saw during the Obama years, the kind of appeasement that Joe Biden tried to accomplish and was ignored by the Iranians, and the kind of appeasement we categorically rejected during the first Trump administration.

[DataRepublican (small r) @DataRepublican]

My opinion on the actual Iran deal (MEK infiltration of Congress aside):

This may end up being an even bigger tar baby for the Trump administration than actually starting the Iranian war.

This has nothing to do with capitulation accusations or JCPOA comparisons. It's that it's much more than a "what's wrong with wanting peace" thing.

It all comes down to: the deal legitimizes the IRGC.

That legitimacy is going to be the decisive factor for a lot of players, Israel most of all. The moment the US signs across the table from the IRGC, it's treating it as a normal government instead of what the Iranians in exile say, what Israel believed going in, what Trump himself said a few months ago.

My read on why the US did it anyway: they got their interests served, wanted an official "war's over" to run on going into the midterms, and needed to buy time on the Strait of Hormuz. Fair enough on our own terms. Disaster in geopolitics.

IMO, the better outcome was to refuse to legitimize any regime at all, even if that meant no deal and just holding the status quo until we figured out a real answer to Hormuz.

[Mark R. Levin @marklevinshow]

Nothing we do in terms of a deal will change the behavior of this enemy.  If you don't believe that you do not know what we are dealing with.  If you do believe that you know that for them deals are made to be broken.

Put aside all the idiocy and static about who loves whom and who does not.  That's the game of online thugs and bots. We are dealing with an ideologically committed terror state that has slaughtered thousands of our fellow Americans, thousands of people in surrounding countries, thousands of Iranians and, as President Trump said, sought nuclear weapons so they could actually use them to kill us.  

There was a time, not long ago, when we never negotiated with terrorists or terror regimes.  Today, we've dealt with intermediaries and now directly with terrorists.  And a senior administration official even declared some or many of them now believe their 47-years of murder, rape, torture, and terrorism was a mistake.  Pretty shocking.  This regime is still executing innocent young people at a record pace.  You wouldn't know it during the last several days.  They don't even come up anymore.  The reporters don't even ask about them.  

Exactly how has this regime changed?  Yes, former leaders are gone, but the regime remains, the ideology remains, the IRGC remains, and as you can tell, they are not rolling over.  We are much more accommodating than we were at the outset.  Let's not fool ourselves.  This is why all the pressure and berating of Israel and Netanyahu.  They simply cannot and must not accommodate the enemy as we wish, and in ways we would never tolerate on our homeland, or in ways the Arabs or Turkey or Pakistan insist on.  

We can't be browbeaten by online thugs into silence or sit ignorantly while all this is swirling around, and we wait for the actual language of the MOU.  We want the information and we want to express our opinions.  Again, this isn't about what team you are on or loyalty tests or whatever.  This is a big damn deal and we, as a people and a nation, want to get it right.  And as far as I am concerned, many of us are ardent supporters of the president and the administration and want to be helpful and provide our own input based on our experiences and knowledge.  Indeed, not everyone in government has all the answers and too damn many of them leak and push their own policies and agendas apart from the president's.  

I know for a fact that Donald Trump is a great and historic president.  I know he is a decent and compassionate man who cares deeply about all of this.  The same can be said about Benjamin Netanyahu, who lost his brother in war and was himself injured in battle.  The Israeli ambassador lost his eldest son in the early days of the war against Hamas in Gaza.  Neither of our nations are led by dictators or kings, like those that surround Israel.  And we are dealing with a death cult that has seized control of Iran and has more blood on its hands than can be measured.  

The Iranian regime has not and will never change its ideology.  And therein lies the problem, as nearly half a century of evil behavior has demonstrated and their own religious and political leaders and books and preachings make clear.  They are about a cause, a revolution.  They will not rest until it is exported everywhere, as Allah is said to command them.  That is the reality.  We are the enemy and must be destroyed.

Those who insist a deal can be made and that it is preferable, then they have to prove it.  That's the way our system works.  I, for one, am glad about it.

[Michael Weiss @michaeldweiss]

$300 bn in reconstruction was pushed by Iranian state media on Friday. Vance came out on Twitter to imply this was deceitful propaganda by the IRGC. Now he suggests it is in fact in the deal, contingent on Iranian compliance. All this could be easily resolved if the U.S. released the MOU.

[The Free Press @TheFP]

President Donald Trump celebrated his 80th birthday with a fight in his backyard—and a peace deal with Iran.

But, @EliLake asks, how much is the memorandum of understanding really worth celebrating?

Its only tangible benefit for the United States and the global economy is that Iran will agree to open the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days—something Trump believed he had achieved more than two months ago in April.

“In other words, Trump is celebrating an agreement that temporarily solves a problem his war helped create,” Lake writes.

The conflict has now moved from the battlefield to the negotiating table. Trump no longer encourages Iranians to rise up. Now, if recent reporting holds up, he is paying the regime that massacred Iran’s people in January for the privilege of negotiations.

“No wonder Iran thinks it’s winning," Lake adds.

Read the full story here: https://t.co/XPBVzhcaOF

[Donald @Donald1860]

@saqrcenter عزيزي دكتور ترامب بالفعل تنازل وضيع نصر عسكري واضح لكنه حوله الى هزيمة، اعتقد انك سمعت تصريح نائب الرئيس الأمريكي فانز بشأن احتمالية حصول ايران على مبلغ تعويض ٣٠٠ مليون دولار.
ترامب رضخ للضغوطات الانتخابية التي لم يحسب حسابها كان من الافضل بدا العمليات بوقت مبكر اكثر.

[Marina Medvin 🇺🇸 @MarinaMedvin]

Instead of telling Iran to stop attacking Israel through Lebanon, Trump tells Israel to absorb the attacks because he’s “so close” to a “peace deal” with Iran that Iran doesn’t even want, and because he described the rocket attack “small and meaningless.”

Every attack on Israel from Lebanon is Iran testing Trump and he seems not to realize it.

[Neil Stone @DrNeilStone]

Trump in the last week

"I've had a great call with Hezbollah"

"I'd like to meet Mojtaba Khamenei, he's respected"

and now

"You've fired your rockets, now let's do a deal"

This is the language of surrender

[Neil Stone @DrNeilStone]

Trump's message to the Iranian regime tonight is absolutely loud and clear

Do whatever you want , whenever you want
There will be no consequences
We are begging for a deal to get out of this at all costs

I never expected this level of weakness from Trump

It's surrender

[Joel Pollak @joelpollak]

Trump says Israel shouldn’t attack because we are close to a deal. Funny how that doesn’t stop Hezbollah or Iran from attacking. This looks weak and would be terrible for America’s deterrent worldwide. Worthy of Biden or Obama, really. My guess would be Israel goes ahead anyway.

[Neil Stone @DrNeilStone]

🔴Trump to Iran regime :

You've fired your rockets , that's enough, come back to negotiations

Translation : You can do whatever you want without any consequences because I want out and a deal at any cost

WEAK

[Open Source Intel @Osint613]

U.S. Senator John Fetterman (D-PA) says he is growing increasingly concerned that President Donald Trump may make a deal with Iran.

"Nuclear dust, that’s the reason why we’re here. This is why I was reasoned and ok with setting myself politically on fire to be the only Democrat for the last 90 days voting against these war powers acts. Presidents always talk about their legacy. At this point, if you cave just for political convenience, what kind of legacy is that?"

(Jewish Insider)

[Lindsey Graham @LindseyGrahamSC]

In Trump 1, it was a clearly stated policy that Iran should not be allowed to continue to support terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah without consequences.

I would urge Trump 2 to continue that policy. Any deal that does not punish Iran in the future for supporting groups like Hezbollah — whose stated goal is to destroy Israel and control Lebanon through force of arms — would be a tremendous missed opportunity. Iran is the weakest they’ve ever been since 1979, but they can still project power through Hezbollah and other proxies. Iran’s ability to generate future October 7-style attacks are not connected to their nuclear program, but rather their unending desire to disrupt the region and eventually destroy Israel through their proxies.

ANY DEAL WITH IRAN MUST CLEARLY STATE THAT IF IRAN PROVIDES FUTURE SUPPORT TO TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS LIKE HEZBOLLAH, IT WILL RESULT IN CRIPPLING SANCTIONS AND OTHER PUNITIVE MEASURES.

[Donald @Donald1860]

@Albasriofficial ممكن، لكن ما فعله ترامب اليوم مخزي.
خذ بعين الاعتبار ان اتفاق اوباما على علاته ومساوءه ابقى حق امريكا باعادة فرض العقوبات وهو ما فعله ترامب بولايته الاولى.
ترامب الان يريد تقديم تنازلات كبيرة وهو امر ربما لم يحدث في التاريخ ان تكون منتصر عسكريا وتقدم تنازلات على الطاولة!

[Luke George🇬🇧🇪🇺 @MrLukeGeorge]

Everything John Bolton has said about Trump has proven to be correct!

[𝐍𝐢𝐨𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐫𝐠 🇮🇷 ✡︎ @NiohBerg]

This is so weak, I'm sorry.

Lebanon should NOT be a factor in the Iran ceasefire whatsoever. These are two separate countries a thousand miles from each other.

Stop messing around and allowing the IRGC to play you while wasting your time.

[Raymond Hakim @RaymondFHakim]

#العراق #إيران
📌القيادي في التيار الصدري فتاح الشيخ علي:
"إيران تاج راس كل عراقي"

📌فشرت على رقبتك
حذاء أصغر طفل عراقي تاج على راسك وراس أبوك

📌ذيل حقير، معدوم الرجولة،
منزوع الكرامة