business with iran. in september, the treasury department authorized the sale of up to 97 airbus and boeing planes to iran. iran is more than just a label state sponsor of terrorism. iran uses its financial sector for international money laundering. iran has been a long-time supporter of the brutal assad regime in syria. it has supported a government that has killed hundreds of thousands of its own people. iran's leader has pledged to wipe america and israel off the map. but none of these facts matter to the obama administration. they will do whatever they can just to make a deal and ensure a legacy. mr. speaker, why are we rewarding and aiding a nations that contributed to so much disorder and destruction in the middle east? to me, it's simply a no-brainer. we must not authorize u.s. aircraft sales to iran. i urge my colleagues to pass h.r. 5711, which would prohibit the treasury secretary from authorizing u.s. financing in connection with commercial passenger aircraft to iran. in god we trust. i yield

when it comes to iran. aviv.has more from tel what does netanyahu want from donald trump when it comes to a policy on iran? >> first of all netanyahu once donald trump to -- wants donald trump to see iran as part of the problem in the middle east rather than the solution. that is the first thing netanyahu wants donald trump to do, to do a shift of approach. obama saw iran as part of the solution. incentives give iran to behave and to act in accordance to u.s. expectation. that is what we saw that nuclear deal. israel wants a 180 shift on how the u.s. approaches iran. >> what about the palestinians? what is their position? netanyahu is going to get all of his ducks in a row and meet with donald trump. what is the palestinian side of this? what are they saying? >> the palestinians are quite , of course. donald trump has said various things in terms of foreign policy. one of the things he said is that israel, he is not going to pressure israel. settlement should come between two states, which of course the pal

. >> iran and their militias in iraq tried to kill me and my soldiers. and now, a new kind of commander in chief. >> i would bomb the [ bleep ] out of them. >> will he lead america's military in a different direction? >> they want to win and they want to win decisively. >> there will soon with b a new resident here and with all the responsibilities our new leader will have, none of is duties are more important. which is wi're about to take stock and look at the american armed forces. and whether we as a nation think we need to go a different direction after eight years of transformtive change. on january 12th, ten american sailors were captured by iran's revolutionary guard after mistakenly entering iranian waters. this this video was later released showing them held at gunpoint, kneeling before their captors and apologizing. not so long ago, the world might have awaited a response from an outraged america, like lie fast and furious. instead, the u.s. secretary of state was soon sounding grateful to iran. >> also want to thank the iranian authorities for

against iran in place for when iran violates the nuclear deal. i believe that those violations have already taken place. earlier this year we already saw the administration buy heavy water from iran. why? because iran was producing more heavy water than it was allowed to under the terms of the agreement. and just a few days ago, mr. speaker, it was announced that iran is once again over the allowable total of heavy water. we have also found out that there have been secret exemptions for iran and that without these exemptions iran would not have been in compliance with the jcpoa, which is the initials of the nuclear deal, before the deal went into implementation day. and so that is why, mr. speaker, it is absolutely vital that we pass this bill of mr. royce's and mr. engel, that we extend these sanctions, that we keep the foundation of our sanctions against iran in place because we need to keep the regime accountable for its violations of its nuclear deal and for its continued illicit activity. there is absolutely no justification at all for allow

the number of computers in iran in 1978, iran had one of the highest per capita rates of computer use. that's remarkable when you think that the age of personal computing was just getting under way. of the shah welcome to u.s. corporations and u.s. businesses to come into the country with new technology. i think the big issue is the whole region, and i think that now we would look back and say that the collapse of the pahlavis monarchy and the shah's rejection for power creates this huge power back in. i don't think that power vacuum has been filled since the graphic many iranians would probably agree with me on that. also i might add me people in the arab world would agree because my conversations, i have spoken with people from lebanon and egypt who would say, you know, the troubles go back to 1979. >> the question in the fifth row. >> thank you. after your quite lengthy story about the reaction of the book, i didn't hear a word, and i'm expecting to hear, so how did the shah got into power and how did he lost his power? i thought that was the crux of the speech tonight, which i cam

your stated goal is to stop iran on the path of nuclear weapons. they have violated the agreement in terms of the heavy water they have on hand which relates to their reactor and at the same time, they will not let u.s. inspectors to see if they are making the bomb or if they really stopped. i am not sure it is working, your thoughts? >> what the white house would argue it is working that iran from their perspective, the closeness with which they could break out and move to a nuclear bomb is significantly strong, at least there are eyes on iran and what they are doing. it has by and large largely worked. there are instances like you mentioned and close to reaching a deal with iran on that. but i think the over all case, and their view is that if you want to avoid a military confrontation with iran this is your best bet. and you may be, there may be places where you may want to be more forceful. >> more eyes. >> but their argument is that it is not something you you want to back out of or force iran to back out either because you are then in an mili

saudi arabia or iran? >> you can ask those two ministers. >> i think you had a flavor of the chaos, the scrums, the rugby-like abilities at opec. i will hand it back to kracarol and louisa. >> you have to have broad shoulders to do that. >> i think steve played rugby in the past. >> they're really differing on how forthcoming they are with regards to whether or not they think a deal will for sure be reached today. even the saudi oil minister, the first gentleman steve spoke to, he was saying yes, it looks good, i think we'll reach a deal, however it wouldn't be bad if the market figures it out itself. >> i think everyone is guarded. everyone is very much optimistic, hopeful, but we know talks could fall through. brent crude, wti crude rallying on the prospect of a deal. 49.03 for brent crude. up 5.71. wti, 47.63. higher by 5.3%. interesting commenting from venezuela, steve asked will the deal mean russia will cut or adhere to the current levels? the venezuelan oil minister said that means a cut. i think th

john: iraq and iran. we know the opec secretary-general this weekend -- she was in iraq last month, all of the diplomacy going on and, as i said, these are the two countries that might not be in line with the rest of opec. iran said it is not going to cut production. it may freeze production, but only at its own reported levels, which are higher than those opec acknowledges. iraq is the country to watch at the moment. arabia and the group and torpedoed the deal last april when iran had an exemption. lot movingnitely a parts. symbol can, our jet setting energy reporter. still to come on the show -- i will donald trump affect middle east markets? we will ask a chief economist of this hour, but next, robin mills weighs in on oil markets and the probability of opec's first output got in eight years. this is bloomberg. ♪ tracy: welcome back. you are watching bloomberg markets middle east. life from dubai, i am tracy alloway. iran's oilmen's is optimistic about iran's proposed production bert kendall.with blo

iran has lived up to the terms of the deal. while iran lives up to the terms of the deal the united states is going to make sure we are fulfilling our commitments. allies -- the present had the opportunity to talk about this. they shared that sentiment. the next administration will have to decide what they want to do. the risk of pulling out of that agreement are great. askingspeaker is president obama to sign a 10 year extension of the iran sanctions act. >> there has been a robust debate about the wisdom of this approach. if there is a bill that has passed by the congress we will take a close look at it. much of the rhetoric is advocates of the bill that want to give the president tools to impose sanctions against iran were it necessary. the truth is the obama administration has significant authority to impose those kinds of financial penalties. this administration has repeatedly imposed sanctions against iran for ballistic missile program that extends guidelinesaccepted of the international community. their support for terro

financial institution to support the export of commercial planes to iran. doing so would violate a key component of the agreement in which the u.s. committed to allow the sales of these planes and the associated financial services necessary to support the sales. earlier this year, the treasury department issued a license to boeing for the sale of 80 passenger planes to iran valued at $17.6 billion and authorized u.s. financial institutions to engage in all transactions necessary to allow boeing to receive payment for the sale. so this legislation not only puts the boeing deal in the crosshairs by prohibiting it from conducting a lawful sale under the agreement, but it also places the viability of the nuclear deal itself in question. moreover, this legislation would breach the good faith provision in the agreement where all parties agreed not to undermine its successful implementation. h.r. 5711 also includes language that prevents the export-import bank from financing exports to iran, which is a red herring because the export -- ex-im bank has not supported

iran deal was the stupidest deal any of us have ever seen. iran is violenting that deal already. there's another violation of it. the congress working with president-elect trump can rei am pose sanctions on iran. we can work with our alleys. we have a lot of leverage. and their violations of other obligations like not building ba list tick missiles that can reach u.s. troops and our allies and not destabilizing the entire region. i look forward very much with president-elect trump to make sure that iran doesn't continue to threaten america citizens and american interests around the world. >> a trump administration is going to approach iran very differently. some people see that as a positive. >> donald trump throughout the campaign he was going to stand up for american interest and take a tougher line with many of our adversaries around the world. that's very important. iran has been allowed to run wild throughout the middle east for the last eight years. the president focused more than anything on getting this nuclear deal no matter what the terms were. that's one reason yz iran

my judgment is no that we don't want to ease up on either iran or isis now but iran will probably have a nuclear weapon well before the ten years that is forecast under this agreement. i think the president-elect is right. as far as i'm concerned this is the worst single international agreement the united states has ever signed and it is not, i think, implementable because not all parts of it have been filed with all parties so it doesn't really take effect yet if you follow its terms. i think the verification provisions are thoroughly rotten. i've negotiated four times on arms control agreements with the soviets and eastern europe and i think anybody who came back with this agreement to washington and said look what i just negotiated should hang his head in shame. it's truly rotten. >> anne-marie, you can't abrogate it entirely because you're not going to get back u.n. security council sanctions because those other countries -- russia, china -- won't comply so all it would mean presumably is americans can put back sanctions unilaterally but iranians could then start enriching again, r

donald trump wants to keep iran deal. the agreement of iran blocked the country's pathway to a nuclear weapon. furthermore, no other country would reimpost american secti sanctions. we have been bombing the hell out of isis, says trump. the president-elect trump describes his phone conversation with president obama in which he learned that the united states has conducted more than 16,000 air strikes of isis, that's a lot. in syria, the obama administration had been focused on defeating isis and not on their president assad. they have been doing what i suggested all along. trump care will be an improvement than obamacare. it will enroll people with proassisting conditions. in return, the company will gain millions of customers since people are facing a mandate to buy insurance or facing a $10,000 fine. i figured out like with houses or cars, insurance cannot work unless we are all in. the president-elect trump explained. donald trump announces sales of the trump organization, the president-elect trump says he's decided tha

iran has an exemption, but they keep going. the questionnaire asking themselves, they want to get to 4 billion -- 4 million barrels a day. he is on a whirlwind tour in venezuela and ecuador and iran. he also had a meeting in london. let's put it together. have big oil and big diplomacy of opec, which leads oil producers exempt from cuts. tracy: peek diplomacy indeed. we have seen oil holding stable. what is the markets view of a likelihood of a deal at this moment in time? manus: we have done a bloomberg survey and analyzed, 14 out of 20 analysts believe there will be a deal on november 30. only seven of the 20 say you will have targets because former deals, real deal to make real when you have proper and specific cuts allocated to individual countries. that potentially will not happen. the market is short. the deal is not the deal that the market has. i leave you with a bat, 14 out of 20 say there will be a deal, seven say you will get a property. that was manus cranny for us. ipo, is supportive of the he expects to bring tran

we were speaking about iran. if you support trump renegotiating nuclear deals, give me your thoughts. khalaf: i would support him because he is elected by the america, and we have to accept that. number one, he has promised to dismantle the nuclear agreement between and arrangement with america and iran. if you will meet the commitments, i will take the first step. there is a lot of things he promised to do. manus: there is a lot of things. -- let him go for the extreme vetting if he did this nuclear deal. khalaf: -- manus: you think by him becoming president, that will make the sale of properties easier, the relationship with trump khalaf:? we have invested with the president, we cannot look at him as a developer. he is not a developer. manus: investing in america, trump in the white house will go for infrastructure, america will grow. would you be prepared to invest in america? khalaf: i will look and see the model, and let's say september next year 2017 to see what he is going to implement. he has a few promis

donald trump wants to keep iran deal. the president-elect has come to realize that the agreement with iran has blocked that country's pathways to a nuclear weapon. furthermore, were the u.s. to pull out, no other country would reimpose sanctions so it would simply hurt american business. i haven't focused on the benefits of the deal, trump said. we have been bombing the hell out of isis, says trump. the president-elect described a phone conversation with president obama in which he learned that the united states and its coalition partners have conducted more than 16,000 air strikes on isis. that's a lot, says trump. noting that in syria, the obama administration has been focused on defeating isis and not on disposing of bashar al assad. they've been doing what i have suggested all along, he noted proudly. the trump administration plans to propose a health care bill that will require insurance companies to enroll people with pre-existing conditions. in return, the companies will gain millions of new customers since people

on the other side, how we fight series concludes with a look at the iran nuclear deal. donald trump in scranton. let's listen in. >> so high i won't tell you what it is. it's very high. all 67 counties in pennsylvania, most of which i won in the primaries -- right? almost all. almost every one of them. are losing obamacare insurers next year. that puts you in a bad position. the truth is, not going to matter. because we are going to repeal it and replace it. not going to matter. don't worry about it. so you can leave here happy. premiums are surging, companies are leaving. insurers are fleeing. doctors are quitting. and deductibles are going through the roof. yet crooked hillary clinton wants to double down on obamacare, making it even more expensive than it is right now. i'm asking for your vote so we can repeal and replace obamacare and save health care for every family in pennsylvania. it was happening so fast. somehow it felt like everything was moving in slow motion. if i didn't react, things could have gotten messy in a hurry. i mean just got that sweet ride with

we're shipping iran, contracted to ship to iran about $7.5 billion worth of arms and saudi arabia $7.5 billion worth of arms in 1975 we brought visuals to their needs. after the war, the so-called reassessment of our relationship to israel, we ineffect tried to make israel the scapegoat for the problems in the middle east and weakened our relationship with israel a great deal and put a cloud on the total commitment that our people fill toward the israelis. there ought to be a unequivocal commitment without change. it ought to be inclination to friendship. i would never let that friendship with people's republic of china stand in the way of preservation of independence and freedom of the people of taiwan. >> mr. frankle, question of government cart ir. i think you two gentlemen settle roughly on the same strategy in the world. how bad do things have to get in our own economy? or how much backwardness or hunger would it take in the world to persuade you that our national security and our survival require very drastic cutbacks in armed spending in dramatic new efforts in other directions?

we have dealt with iran. what do you want to see him say on iraq? >> we want iraq to come back to the arabs. >> some people would say obama changed policy and pulled back. i think we do have to say there are both sides on that. let's talk about you, your business, and markets. warren buffett moved a lot of money into cash before this election. did you take any preparation for the risks the market was assuming on a trump victory? are you surprised by how the markets had reacted? >> the markets are reacting positively now. positively know, i'm thinking i have to hold for a few months. i will wait and see if he implements what he promises. >> if he introduces what he promises, you salute him. let's talk about the dollar because it has an incredibly important impact. look to the left, a little bit hazy this morning, but he owns a few hotels. workranes you can see at pretty much a sign to this man, so let's talk about the dollar and the impact on the region. strong dollar -- has it hurt your hotel occupancy? are you still prepared to build like this? >>

iran deal was the stupidest deal any of us have ever seen. iran is violenting that deal already. there's another violation of it. the congress working with president-elect trump can rei am pose sanctions on iran. we can work with our alleys. we have a lot of leverage. and their violations of other obligations like not building ba list tick missiles that can reach u.s. troops and our allies and not destabilizing the entire region. i look forward very much with president-elect trump to make sure that iran doesn't continue to threaten america citizens and american interests around the world. >> a trump administration is going to approach iran very differently. some people see that as a positive. >> donald trump throughout the campaign he was going to stand up for american interest and take a tougher line with many of our adversaries around the world. that's very important. iran has been allowed to run wild throughout the middle east for the last eight years. the president focused more than anything on getting this nuclear deal no matter what the terms were. that's one reason yz iran

. >> the story from middle east sources is that iran has helped the united states free a hostage from lebanon. >> they called it the reagan revolution. but for me it always seemed more like a rediscovery of our values. once you begin a great movement, there's no telling where it will end. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >>> thank you. >> we're faced with an unprecedented situation in this country today. jimmy carter's demonstrated inability to govern our nation. but i have faith in the greatness of the people of this country. this country has everything that it always had before, except the leadership in washington that this country requires. >> reagan put a lot of energy and effort into 1980. the economy had been through a recession, and in addition to that, the united states had been embarrassed by the iran hostage crisis. the country wanted to turn the corner and ronald reagan held the promise of all of that. >> america is turning to a new political direction for at least the next four years. to the right. republican. ronald reagan rode an electrical vote landslide to the white house. and republic

at the time the main argument against it was iran wouldn't abide by the deal. that they would cheat. we now have over a year of evidence that they have abided by the agreement. that's not just my opinion and not just people in my administration, but the opinion of israeli and military officers who are part of the government that opposed the deal. so my suspicion is when the president-elect comes in and he's consulting with his republican colleagues on the hill, that they will look at the facts because to unravel a deal that is working and preventing iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon would be hard to explain particularly if they were freed from any obligations and pursue any weapon. keep in mind, this isn't just an agreement between us and the iran but our closest allies. pull out would then require us to sart sanking those other countries in europe, china or russia, that were still abiding by the deal because from their perspective, iran has done what it supposed to do. becomes more difficult to undo something that's working than to undo something that isn't

he does think it's more versus islam, and oddly he conflates that with iran because iran is actually opposed to isis. but if you listen to mike flynn he says iran is the major enemy. mike flynn has even suggested overthrowing the islamic republic of raab iran. and we know that trump is hostile to iran. so i don't think he's going to focus on the threat that's more dangerous to us which are these lone wolves and much more on fighting islam, fighting extremist islamists, which will make us less safe. >> i think of course there's going to continue to be a significant military response, and i agree with jim that that's had some progress and it will continue to. but it can't only be a military response. i think the danger under trump is the potential that the united states becomes a place where muslims living within our borders are unwelcome. certainly the rhetoric we've seen consistently through the campaign would make them feel that way. it's harder to fight terror in france or in belgium because their large muslim populations that are not integrated in the broader country, they don't f

iran is determined to boost production after years of iran is determined to boost production after years of sanctions. they want to pay for its war with militants in the north. asian stocks are extending the global rally. that is after all of the major indices closed at all-time highs. declinedt bond yields as odds of a rate hike held at 100%. the offshore yuan has kept a record against the u.s. dollar breaking through for the first time. they resumed to fix after a one-day break setting the official rate at 6.8904. it is a key level for the timesheet. tradingore currencies at its nearest level since 2008. international bond sale should raise $6 billion through 2017. the first issuance may be delayed because of market volatility. the window is closing fast. -- ets will be very global news 20 for hours a day. this is bloomberg. tracy: thank you. we are going to be staying with egypt now. a very big story in the region. investors are finding a bright spot that has follow donald trump's election victory. you spoke with the finance minister. the stock market is on eight hair. the currency is

. >>> iran warning of retaliation if the u.s. breaches the nuclear deal as president-elect donald trump vows to unwind the deal. president obama plans to make it more difficult to scrap the deal. we have this letter came out from paul ryan essentially demanding that the president request that the administration take no further actions to bolster the international investment in iran, but at the same time the president is trying to get more businesses involved in iran so it will make it more difficult for donald trump to tear up the deal. what do you think? >> i don't think any businesses are going to do anything between now and january. there's way too much uncertainty. there's an administration going out and a new one coming in. it would be crazy for businesses to change course right now. i think there's a lot of -- there are a lot of people both republicans and democrats urging the president-elect trump to be cautious in his actions in iran and i think that's something the country is going to stand behind. >> the country is gett

i don't know anything about the mazarati dealership in iran. it's an iconic brand that is decades old and i assume it probably had a franchise there from when the shaw was running the country. liz: thanks, peter. peter barnes. closing bell 45 minutes away. again, records all around. looking at the dow jones industrial, we are well above a closing record. we need to stay there, though, apple among the top movers here just dpiend -- behind dupont. maybe investors think problems are not as bad as samsung. apple's battery, has it happened to you guys, just shut down your phone, happened to me last night, what the smartphone giant is planning to do about it straight ahead. you should be worrying that a cyber crime syndicate is loading up there too. cyber response ceo joseph here live on why we should all be aware of the trap. what is that? you need to know next on countdown. you do all this research on a perfect car, then smash it into a tree. your insurance company raises your rates. maybe you should've done more research on them. for drivers with

tragedies in iran, attempts at revolution. >> what's going on in iran is massive, mostly peaceful protests over the alleged stealing of an election. >> in the u.s. capital, a political storm erupts over a ground breaking climate change bill. >> we have been talking about this issue for decades. and now is the time to finally act. >> south carolina has literally lost its governor. >> once you get to a certain level of importance, particularly in public service, it's sort of hard to disappear. that makes the disappearance of governor mark sanford extra weird. >> we had covered the governor mark sanford arrest deal. >> farrah fawcet has publicly been sharing her battle with cancer returned to the hospital this week. >> for the past years '70s icon farrah fawcett has been fighting for her life. all of these headlines collide on june 25th. >> june 25th was a day where things just got eclipsed. >> how is farrah, how is she doing? >> farrah is gone. >> what turned out to be farrah's last night, we spent the evening in the hospital. we knew that it was likely to be sometime that night or early the

the thing that troubles me is the iran angle on this. if you look at general flynn, he wants to go into iran, undue that agreement, put more sanctions on. and just the whole administration seems to be heading towards a confrontation with iran. they look at iran as an existential threat to the united states. going back to mattis, he's a general's general. he's a good choice. at the end of the day, it's up to president-elect trump to decide what to do about iran. this would be a completely new chapter in the middle east. it would be high-kissing of going after iran right now. >> general marks, do you see it as possible and even plausible given that mattis retired in 2013? and as i understand it that kind of retirement wouldn't meet certain qualifications, meaning a retired general is required to be out of uniform for seven years before taking control of pent gone responsibilities. would that be applicable here? >> that certainly would apply, but that can be approved simply. if i could, what bob is saying is really the crux of the issue. no

if we could actually -- i will support iran when iran is willing to be part of the world culture and starts recognizing israel's right to exist. there are my brothers and sisters in arms all over the world who can be impacted by this. this is a commonsense rule for two things. we're not going to use the bank accounts of americans to buy planes for iran that can be used against us in war. we're not going to have midnight rule best both parties, doesn't matter party here. this is congressional, this is article 1, this is base exconstitution. let the congress do its work, not a president carrying out an agenda. these are important bills that make smart, commonsense policy changes to protect americans. for that reason i urge my colleagues to support the legislation provided for by the rule and the rule itself. with that, i yield back the balance of my time and move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the ayes have it. ms

take the iran nuclear deal. trump has gone to the campaign saying, this is a horrendous deal and, we are going to make great deals. if you break the deal, suddenly iran is able to make nuclear weapons. even israeli intelligence, a country whose prime minister was ferociously against the iran nuclear deal, will be the first to tell you the iran no longer has what is called breakout capacity. do you really want to reverse that? charlie: there is an indication that some people who were against it now says we do not want to abdicate this. david: in other words, this is what one can hope for. this is what obama has bargained for himself. i will keep my head cool and try to encourage what good instincts they are among trump and his people and hope for the best, because what else can he do? his job is not to be a political firebrand. the question is, what happens on january 20 with obama? had hillary clinton won, i think you would have gone off to a ahu and had a good long rest, started writing his memoir. he is awfull

iran's role in iraq will always be destructive. iran will always want a weak iraq. it doesn't matter who governs in iraq. if hamanahi's son became the prime minister of iraq it will be in iran's interest for iraq to be weak. i'm not saying we want the chaos they had in 2014. the last point i'll make -- and i have gone over my time, i apologize -- is that the pmus and militias have to be disbanded after the military operation is over and that is much, much easier said than done. i am told -- we'll see if this happens, that after mosul is liberated from isil to expect a fatwa from the grand ayatollah al sistani thanking the rank and file of the pmus and telling them they need to go home. as mr. prejean said, the leadership of the pmus have entirely different ideas but i have to say, to the extent that we maintain sectarian and nonconstitutionally based militias and allow them to roam freely, i couldn't agree more with mr. prejean than what he says about we're setting up the conditions for isil 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0, we have to look to rebuilding a state of iraq and that is

approaches iran. what about the palestinians? what is their position? netanyahu will get all of his ducks in a row and meet with trump, but what is the palestinian side of this? what are they saying? >> the palestinians are quite concerned. inmp has said various things terms of his foreign-policy, but one of the things he said is is notrael -- that he going to pressure israel and that a settlement should become that come between two banks states. bey believe there should international pressure on israel: that's why the palestinians have been promoting the french peace initiative that would have foreign countries placing pressure on them to come together, so the palestinians are concerned that trump is going to move the israeli embassy to jerusalem from tel aviv, something that has not been done even though other presidential candidates have promised that in campaigns before. they are concerned that donald trump will take a harder line and ignore their interests, and they are threatening to take stronger action in the united nations that will make the li

certain commercial passenger aircraft to iran. these licenses contain strict conditions to ensure that the planes will be used exclusively for commercial passenger use and cannot be resold or transferred to a designated entity. i want to go to my former -- my guest, former special assistant to president george w. bush, scott jennings, on this. scott, this report seems to indicate that iran is using these commercial planes to smuggle weapons. the administration per their statement says iran is only used them for commercial use. is there no way to check? shouldn't there be a way to check to ensure that's what they are using them for? >> that's exactly right. just because they say they are going to use them for that purpose doesn't mean they are going to. we have intelligence from the israelis and ambassador to the united nations from israel unveiled their own intelligence which indicates iran is using these aircraft to smuggle weapons to hezbollah. we've got real consternation on the hill and hill sources today saying that the obama

iran deal. on the benghazi committee, he outspoken against hillary clinton. committeember of the under trey gowdy issued its issued ad pompeo dissent saying the report was not tough enough, and being very critical of hillary clinton and the obama administration overall. he graduated first in his class at west point and then went to harvard law school, intoned to kansas and went business. david, what you know about him and his views? david: karen had it exactly right. one of the things i find -- heng about his views came in in 2010 in the tea party wave. he was extremely critical of president obama for closing the black sites the cia had used to interrogate prisoners in iraq and afghanistan. he has been very critical of any move by the cia backwards on the and whatterboarding the bush administration delicately called enhanced interrogation and president obama called torture. the big question is if he tries to move the cia backward on this, if you tries to go back to where was, is he going to run

deal is iran's nuclear program starts again. i think that's true of a lot of has saids that trump about foreign policy on the campaign trail. implementation, they're more complicated than he said they were and we don't know he'll followthrough on and if he tries, whether he'll be able to and how it will play out. we've almost never seen ambiguity like this on foreign policy. pete: things happen that he'll have to respond to. i'm wondering about syria. he have to make big decisions about what we'll do there? michael: sure, but that's an example about american engagement around the world. beingot interested in us a party in the syrian civil war. he does not share the obama weinistration's view that need a change of regime in vera. syria. he will probably stop our program of arming syrian rebel fighters. do is knock out isis and he says he'll partner with russia to do it but i think we'll bethat increasingly engaged in a covert trying tog rebels, shape the future of a syrian government, is probably over at this point. pete: he has

iran oil minister saying the oil output for iran is important to the will of the people. here is a chart to break down the issues in the market when it comes to the oil deal. the big question is if we do or do not get the deal come what happens to the oil price? i have heard numbers as low as 20's, but that is a confusing point. brent the white line and is the blue line. bright around the could ties. brent at the record high. what if we see some kind of short covering rally if we get a deal and how steep can it be? the question, what happens to u.s. shale producers? this really is the saudi's worst nightmare, this is the correlation between the old oil prices and the oil rig count in the u.s. 5.1 butsitive barely, the idea is as oil prices rise, you have shell producers at riggs, particularly in the permian basin in texas and at the stocks in oklahoma. if you see an increase in riggs, you will see increase in production. this is the correlation that makes the saudis a little bit nervous. the big question is the curve of oil. this is the one month and five-year curve of br

i don't want the secretary of state to be somebody saying oh we need to bomb iran, we need to bomb iran yesterday or the day before or the day after. you want the chief diplomat to be saying these are the things i think we can do to oppose iran and let them know we are not going to be a pushover and from to stop them from doing what they're doing. doesn't involve necessarily invading iran. >> would you want them to actually renegotiate the iran nuclear deal, whoever that secretary of state may be? would that be a requirement? are you okay with the iran nuclear deal staying in place? >> i think most people misinterpret the iran agreement. i was against the agreement because i didn't think it did enough. but it did do some things. it gave a bunch of money to iran early on. which i disagreed with. that money has already been given. and now iran is expected to comply with nuclear sanctions. not conventional weapon sanctions but nuclear sanctions. so far there hasn't been evidence presented that they have not adhered to the nuclear sanctions. what everybody is complaining about, i still comp

so far we have seen iran and iraq resisting that notion. iarn says it -- iran pumped about 4 million, iraq close to 3.7 million. 4.6 million's that is a key sticking point. angie: all right, tracy, thank you so much for that. tracy alloway. coming up, prime minister may becomes more assertive as domestic plans take shape. this is bloomberg. ♪ manus: it'bloomberg marketss: middle east. 7:25. good morning. angie: good morning. it's afternoon here in hong kong. a quick market check across asia. let's take a quick look at what has been happening. we're seeing stocks rise just a little bit after a two-day drop. we have the seeing it basically selloff as a result of the trump president-elect coming in january and there is an expectation of increased inflation, the fed rate hike. right now it is down but you are seeing some gains in hong kong and the topix. let's get you a quick check of the latest business flash headlines. america's number two cigarette maker might be looking for a better offer from a bigger rival, british american tobacco. sou

if iran commits these types of violations. and it makes it very clear that we will continue to work on a regional security strategy so that our partners in the region know that the united states will continue to be on their side against the aggression that we've seen from the iran regime. to me that is the responsible action for us to take in order to carry out what should be u.s. leadership in isolating iran, getting it to change its behavior, recognizing that it's been a major problem for the security of the united states and the region, and we must continue to be actively engaged. with that, mr. president, i would suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: mr. alexander: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator tennessee. mr. alexander: i ask unanimous consent to vitiate the quorum call. fer sphe withou-- the presiding officer: without objection. mr. alexander: i ask consent to speak for as much time as i may require. off

h [ inaudible question ] >> iran is a good example of the gap i think between some of the rhetoric in this town, not i think there was a really robust debate about the merits of the iran deal before it was completed. and i actually was pretty proud of how our democracy processed that. it was a serious debate, i think people of good will were on both sides of the issue. ultimately we were able to persuade members of congress and the public at least enough of at the time the main argument against it was iran wouldn't abide by the deal. that they would cheat. we now have over a year of evidence that they have abided by the agreement. that's not just my opinion, it's not just people in my administration, that's the intelligence officers who are part of a government that vehemently opposed the deal. so my suspicion is that when the president elect comes in and he is consulting with his republican colleagues on the hill that they will look at the facts because to unravel a deal that's working and preventing iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon would be hard to pl were to have them freed from

we're shipping iran, contracted to ship to iran about $7.5 billion worth of arms and saudi arabia $7.5 billion worth of arms in 1975 we brought visuals to their needs. after the war, the so-called reassessment of our relationship to israel, we ineffect tried to make israel the scapegoat for the problems in the middle east and weakened our relationship with israel a great deal and put a cloud on the total commitment that our people fill toward the israelis. there ought to be a unequivocal commitment without change. it ought to be inclination to friendship. i would never let that friendship with people's republic of china stand in the way of preservation of independence and freedom of the people of taiwan. >> mr. frankle, question of government cart ir. i think you two gentlemen settle roughly on the same strategy in the world. how bad do things have to get in our own economy? or how much backwardness or hunger would it take in the world to persuade you that our national security and our survival require very drastic cutbacks in armed spending in dramatic new efforts in other directions?

. >> iran is a good example of the g gap. there was a robust debate of the merits of the iran deal before it was complete. and i actually was proud of how our democracy process that. it was a serious debate and people of goodwill on both sides of the issues. ultimately, we were able to persuade members of the politublic at least enough support him. at the time, the main argument is iran would not abide by the deal that they were cheap. we now have over a year of evidence that they have abide by the president. that's not just my opinion or my administration. they'll look at the facts because to unravel a deal that's working. keep in mind this was not an agreement between us and the iran people. it is between other countries. some are closest allies. for us to pull out would then require us to start sanctioning or china or russia that were still abiding booing by the dea because from their perspective, iran had done what they're supposed to do. it becomes more difficult, i think to undo something that's working than undo someth

iran's role in iraq will always be destructive. iran will always want a weak iraq. it doesn't matter who governs s in iraq. if hamanahi's son became the prime minister of iraq it will be in iran's interest for iraq to be weak. i'm not saying we want the chaos they had in 2014. the last point i'll make -- and i have gone over my time, i apologize -- is that the pmus and militias have to be disbanded after the military operation is over and that is much, much easier said than done. i am told -- we'll see if this happens, that after mosul is liberated from isil to expect a fatwa from the grand ayatollah al sistani thanking the rank and file of the pmus and telling them they need to go home. as mr. prejean said, the leadership of the pmus have entirely different ideas but i have to say, to the extent that we maintain sectarian and nonconstitutionally based militias and allow them to roam freely, i couldn't agree more with mr. prejean than what he says about we're setting up the conditions for isil 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0, we have to look to rebuilding a state of iraq and that

you talk about the iran deal. i mean, pompeo was one of the people who has calls for not ripping up but completely renegotiating the iran deal. again, on the benghazi committee, he was very, very tough and outspoken against the obama administration and particularly hillary clinton. he and jim jordan, who is another republican congressman, member of the benghazi committee, when the committee under trey gowdy issued its report, pompeo issued a dissent saying the report wasn't tough enough and, again, being very, very critical of hillary clinton and the obama administration overall. >> rose: he seems to be a bright guy. graduated, according to his web site, first in his class at west point and went to harvard law school and returned to kansas and went into business. david what do you know about him and his views? >> well, karen had it exactly right. one of the other things i found striking about his views is as soon as he came in in 2010 as part of the sort of tea party wave, he was extremely critical of president ob

after isis are we helping iran? >> yeah, this is kind of an unusual proverb, the enemy of my enemy is my friend specially after the president elect decides to disengage from backing antiassad militias in syria, we quite literally are taking some of the pressure off of assad, iran and russia. jon: so what would be your your approach in a new administration to hold iran's feet to the fire but also to -- to, you know, not necessarily let the pressure up on bashar al-assad? >> well, my approach would be to do what they're doing now, the president elect is really pulling in an a-team whether he appoints them to cabinet positions or not, anyone who has previously served the u.s. government specially in the military will be asked for advice certainly flagging general officer, he has the opportunity to talk to generals mattis, flynn u guys that fought iranian-backed for years, i would implore the incoming u.s. government talked to our smartest people and take their advice. jon: criticism of the obama administration has been