Fox’s Trey Gowdy Trashes Trump Peace Deal for Making Iran a ‘Richer Country’ Even Though ‘They Lost The War’

Fox News host Trey Gowdy offered a scathing assessment of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that President Donald Trump is going to sign with Iran on Friday, bashing it for making Iran “a richer country” even though “they lost the war.”

The 14-point MOU was released on Wednesday. Trump has touted the deal as one that will reopen the Strait of Hormuz and prevent Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon, but the terms of the deal have been excoriated by critics — including many on the right.

Count Gowdy among those critics.

The host of Sunday Night in America joined his colleagues Sandra Smith and John Roberts to report on the terms of the MOU Wednesday afternoon, and voiced multiple points of contention with the deal.

Gowdy began by saying that he was “surprised, honestly” by the terms of the MOU because “we literally had our foot on their throat — militarily, economically.”

When he read the MOU, Gowdy said, “I didn’t believe it — I thought somebody was spoofing me when I saw it, because I see what we are giving up.”

“And then I see this word ‘downblend’ and I’m not the smartest guy in the world, Sandra,” he continued, “but if you can ‘downblend’ you can ‘upblend’ and how long would it take Iran to upblend because Donald Trump is going to be gone in January of 2029 but the so-called Supreme Leader [of Iran] will not be.”

“So here’s my question for my fellow citizens,” Gowdy said. “Do you really think Iran has abandoned its nuclear ambition? Do you believe ’em? What do you think they are going to do with the $300 billion? What are they gonna do with the oil revenue? Do you think they are going to build schools? Do you think they are going to make women’s lives better? Or are they going to continue to target America and Israel?”

“I happen to think the latter,” Gowdy said emphatically.

Smith noted that the details of the MOU were “vague” about how Iran would be monitored and how “good behavior” would be determined.

Gowdy agreed, pointing out that the entities named in the MOU, the International Atomic Nuclear Agency and the United Nations were ones that “do not reassure the American people,” because they have “zero confidence” in the first and even less in the UN.

He commented that he “would really like to hear from” Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe “on the intelligence of whether or not Iran thinks they got the better of us,” because he was still puzzled how “we had an economic stranglehold on that country,” but when “you go back to the status quo ante before the blockade, how are we better off? What did we get?”

Smith asked Gowdy why he thought Trump had agreed to this deal when the administration had said he “would not agree to any deal unless it was a great deal.”

“Well, I hate to be cynical, you know that,” Gowdy said, but “don’t we have midterms coming up? Are gas prices high?”

He added that he was open to being “corrected,” but needed to hear from Rubio and Ratcliffe “and if they tell me that this is as good as it gets, then I’ll go back to being a country prosecutor.”

Gowdy was especially scornful about the issue of the lifting of sanctions and billions of dollars to be transferred to Iran.

“They are better off than they were before hostilities began and that should not be the consequence of war,” he declared. “When you lose a war — I mean, think about it, Sandra, we went into Iran and rescued a downed pilot. We had total control over that country. We were winning militarily and economically. And when you are in that position, you negotiate from strength. You don’t give people money. You don’t give them access. What are they going to do with the money?…You know that Iran is going to use this for nefarious purposes! We all know that. The regime has not changed. They’re just richer.”

Roberts brought up the part of the MOU that addressed Iran’s uranium and required “at minimum the destruction of the highly enriched uranium at 60% by downblending,” asking Gowdy if he was “comfortable” with that, noting Hugh Hewitt had remarked that if you can downblend, you can upblend it again.

“Professor Hewitt is exactly right,” replied Gowdy. “I will be happy when they have no uranium whatsoever. That’s when I’ll be happy. But they are downblending it — and to further Professor Hewitt’s point, the so-called Supreme Leader ain’t going anywhere. Donald Trump, the longest he can serve is January 2029 and God only knows what comes after that. So if you don’t think Iran is sitting there saying, ‘Let’s just wait him out, let’s wait him out’ — because they can, and we can’t…Downblending means you can upblend. It does not mean it is obliterated. It does not mean it is gone. It means we are going to save it for later on.”

On the topic of the $300 billion construction fund, Gowdy rhetorically asked viewers if there were “placated by the fact that the money would come from the Qataris or Saudi Arabia and not us,” because “it’s still going to be used for weapons, and I’m pretty sure that the lifting of economic sanctions takes place immediately, and I am pretty sure that the removal of the blockade takes place immediately.”

“Look, Iran is a richer country as a result of this MOU and they lost the war!” Gowdy continued. “That’s the part I can’t get my head around. They lost! And they are coming out of this richer with this little phrase called ‘downblend,’ which they are just going to wait him out and hope for a president that’s focused on something else, and then they’re going to upblend again. This is never going to change until you remove it all or remove the regime. Those are the two options.”

Gowdy flat-out said he did not believe the terms of the MOU regarding the opening of the Strait of Hormuz without fees.

“There is going to be a toll and this is why people hate lawyers,” he said. “‘Within 30 days’ doesn’t mean 30 days. Could be tomorrow. It means at the end of the 30 days, we’ve got to be gone. But chances are we are going to be gone sooner than that.”

He further noted that the MOU did not include any funds for American soldiers who were killed or wounded during the war.

“Is there a fund for prosthetics for all the American soldiers that Iran blew their arms and legs off? Is there any fund for the men and women that were injured trying to stop Iran from trying to attack Israel weeks ago? How about the guys and gals that bled and died on our country’s behalf. Where is their fund? I didn’t see that in the MOU.”

Watch the clip above via Fox News.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!