Priebus: Hillary Clinton’s Bad Deal With Iran

Hillary Clinton Discusses Economic Plan At New Hampshire Campaign Events
Darren McCollester/Getty Images

After President Obama announced the nuclear deal with Iran, the criticism from leaders and lawmakers was swift:

“We, the United States, are accepting the eventuality that [Iran] will acquire a nuclear weapon.”

“The deal doesn’t end Iran’s nuclear program, it preservers it.”

“I’m disappointed in this deal.”

“I’m deeply concerned and disappointed by what appears to be its terms.”

“There is nothing that I read…that alleviates my skepticism”

“It is not the good deal with Iran that we all wanted.”

And that’s just what Democrats had to say! (Presidential candidate Jim Webb, Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY), Rep. Steve Israel (D-NY), and former vice presidential nominee Joe Lieberman, respectively.)

In contrast to these voices, however, the Democrats’ de facto presidential nominee Hillary Clinton embraced the bad deal. Of course, if things go further south, you can be sure she will try to distance herself. So it’s worth remembering she was integral to the process. You could even argue that were it not for Hillary Clinton, we wouldn’t be stuck with an agreement that makes so many concessions to Iran.

As Politico reported back in March, “The talks began with two of Clinton’s top deputies when she was Secretary [of State.]”

Jake Sullivan, a Clinton advisor, said this week that “Clinton was centrally involved,” even “starting the diplomacy.”

In short, Hillary Clinton owns this deal, which should lead many Americans to ask why the deal doesn’t even live up to her previously stated conditions.

In August 2014, she said, “I’ve always been in the camp that held that [Iran] did not have a right to enrichment.” But with this deal, Iran will be permitted to enrich uranium and maintain a 3.67 percent uranium level at its Natanz facility.

Similarly, Clinton previously said that Iran’s breakout time “should be longer than one year,” according to Politico. Instead the breakout time—“the time it would take to enrich enough uranium for a bomb”—is just one year.

Many of President Obama’s promises were broken, too. For example, there won’t be “anytime, anywhere” inspections of Iran’s facilities or suspected sites.

Others are rightly frustrated that the embargo on ballistic missiles will be lifted after eight years and that the conventional arms embargo will be lifted after five. What’s more, Iran continues to hold American hostages.

So, aside from President Obama and Hillary Clinton, who is celebrating the deal?

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, to name a couple.

On the other hand, our ally Israel is deeply concerned for its security. What more do we really need to know?

Hillary Clinton shares responsibility for this deal. So she owes Americans a few answers:

Why is she lowering her standards?

As president, what other bad deals would she make with hostile regimes?

Even if this deal actually delays Iran from getting a nuclear bomb, what would she do to ensure Iran never gets a bomb?

Or, is she planning to pass that problem onto the next generation?

Reince Priebus is RNC Chairman.


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.