angelaschurr :
No one seems to be pointing this out… In 2018, President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal—because The deal was “flawed” and didn’t address Iran’s ballistic missile program, Iran’s regional influence, proxy support and the sundown clause (2030). However, despite these short comings this deal did halt their nuclear program and allowed us to keep an eye on them. In this interview Ted Cruz clearly said the red line for republicans was Iran getting a nuclear weapon. So if we had a fairly good agreement in place already, no violations to anyone’s knowledge was committed, why withdrawal? Especially when the Trump administration didn’t have a replacement? Since the withdrawal Iran has ramp up its program again. Our situation with Iran is literally the result from Trump first administration withdrawal. I fully believe half the problems in our government is because it is a contest to them to who gets credit. Since the Nuclear Iran deal was under Obama, the republicans didn’t want them to get that credit so they withdrew. We see evidence of this with the boarder bill that was proposed last year. February 2024, Senators James Lankford (R–OK), Kyrsten Sinema (I–AZ), and Chris Murphy (D–CT) crafted a comprehensive border security bill (~$118 billion), addressing asylum procedures, border personnel, detention expansion, and giving the president authority to close the border under certain conditions. The bill passed the Senate floor vote test at 50–49, but needed 60 votes to actually advance Trump publicly opposed the bill, urging Republicans to reject it, calling it a “gift” to Biden and a risk to GOP prospects. Critics—including Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy—said Republicans rejected the deal on purpose to leave the border in crisis so Trump could campaign on the problem. It’s absolutely true that political games—especially concerns over who gets credit—often shape legislative behavior.
2025-06-19 04:21:06