Senator Eric Schmitt

So there's a considerable amount of tension, and it goes into the thinking of Iran as well, not just their animosity or relationship with the U.S., but also their relationship with Israel, which is pretty obvious, but then also their relationship with the Gulf states as well.

So there's a considerable amount of tension, and it goes into the thinking of Iran as well, not just their animosity or relationship with the U.S., but also their relationship with Israel, which is pretty obvious, but then also their relationship with the Gulf states as well.

And ultimately, to get to some sort of peace agreement with Iran, I'm proud of President Trump for actually opening dialogue and discussion. But to get to peace, ultimately, it has to, I think, sort of include some of the Gulf states as well, including Saudi Arabia. So Saudi Arabia could be a more constructive player here. And hopefully that's part of the discussions.

And ultimately, to get to some sort of peace agreement with Iran, I'm proud of President Trump for actually opening dialogue and discussion. But to get to peace, ultimately, it has to, I think, sort of include some of the Gulf states as well, including Saudi Arabia. So Saudi Arabia could be a more constructive player here. And hopefully that's part of the discussions.

I think nobody wants them, including myself, to have nuclear weapons. But strictly from a military point of view of how we prevent that, once they get to enrichment of say 95 to 98%, you can probably have a cup full of uranium that is enriched that much and that can be enough for a bomb. So once you have about 10 cup fulls, you've got enough for 10 bombs.

I think nobody wants them, including myself, to have nuclear weapons. But strictly from a military point of view of how we prevent that, once they get to enrichment of say 95 to 98%, you can probably have a cup full of uranium that is enriched that much and that can be enough for a bomb. So once you have about 10 cup fulls, you've got enough for 10 bombs.

And can that be hidden in places that you can't militarily get to without a ground invasion and taking over every inch of Iran? probably it will be difficult. So ultimately the discussion about trying to get an agreement is one that is going to be necessary. I think you can't really bomb them out of the nuclear age. You have to sort of have a negotiation. We have a great deal of leverage.

And can that be hidden in places that you can't militarily get to without a ground invasion and taking over every inch of Iran? probably it will be difficult. So ultimately the discussion about trying to get an agreement is one that is going to be necessary. I think you can't really bomb them out of the nuclear age. You have to sort of have a negotiation. We have a great deal of leverage.

They have an economy that hurts. They have an economy that doesn't do very well. Their people aren't necessarily that happy. But I think we should use our sanctions in a way we rarely do, and that is to trade them, trade sanction relief and trade and the benefits that come up with that, allowing them to participate in the world market in exchange for them not enriching.

They have an economy that hurts. They have an economy that doesn't do very well. Their people aren't necessarily that happy. But I think we should use our sanctions in a way we rarely do, and that is to trade them, trade sanction relief and trade and the benefits that come up with that, allowing them to participate in the world market in exchange for them not enriching.

And there have been discussions of them not enriching or anything they've enriched above a certain amount, trading that out. and not enriching above a certain percentage. And I think that's something we ought to explore. I think Trump is exploring it. And I'm excited, at least optimistic, that these discussions are ongoing.

And there have been discussions of them not enriching or anything they've enriched above a certain amount, trading that out. and not enriching above a certain percentage. And I think that's something we ought to explore. I think Trump is exploring it. And I'm excited, at least optimistic, that these discussions are ongoing.

So in 2017, I voted for the Trump tax cuts and they became the Republican tax cuts. And this was done through reconciliation. I was all in. I think they did a great job. I think they created that economy that Trump was always bragging about with the lowest historic unemployment before we got into the pandemic. I'm still for all of that and I'm for making it permanent.

So in 2017, I voted for the Trump tax cuts and they became the Republican tax cuts. And this was done through reconciliation. I was all in. I think they did a great job. I think they created that economy that Trump was always bragging about with the lowest historic unemployment before we got into the pandemic. I'm still for all of that and I'm for making it permanent.

That's one big aspect of the bill. The second aspect is spending cuts. I'm always for more rather than less. I think they'll end up being wimpy, but I would still support the bill even with wimpy spending cuts and permanent tax cuts if we weren't going to increase the debt ceiling by $5 trillion.

That's one big aspect of the bill. The second aspect is spending cuts. I'm always for more rather than less. I think they'll end up being wimpy, but I would still support the bill even with wimpy spending cuts and permanent tax cuts if we weren't going to increase the debt ceiling by $5 trillion.

And the reason why the debt ceiling is so important to me and used to be important to most conservatives is that the debt ceiling is adding everything up and gives you a simple number that represents really what's going to happen. So when they tell you they're going to cut $800 billion or $1.5 trillion, the numbers are confusing and you don't know exactly what that means. What does it add up to?

And the reason why the debt ceiling is so important to me and used to be important to most conservatives is that the debt ceiling is adding everything up and gives you a simple number that represents really what's going to happen. So when they tell you they're going to cut $800 billion or $1.5 trillion, the numbers are confusing and you don't know exactly what that means. What does it add up to?

What I can tell you for certain is that if you raise the debt ceiling 5 trillion, you're going to raise the debt 5 trillion. 5 trillion over two years is just something I can't support. So come September 30th, there will be a deficit of 2.2 trillion. We will spend 2.2 trillion, or Congress will, more than comes in. And you say, well, whose responsibility is that?

What I can tell you for certain is that if you raise the debt ceiling 5 trillion, you're going to raise the debt 5 trillion. 5 trillion over two years is just something I can't support. So come September 30th, there will be a deficit of 2.2 trillion. We will spend 2.2 trillion, or Congress will, more than comes in. And you say, well, whose responsibility is that?