I saw a tape of Ben Rhodes on Fox News this past weekend saying Iran is complying with the deal and that the U.S. should also.

Rhodes, last May, also gave an interview in which he admitted that the administration pushed a narrative (lied) to the media and others to get the deal done. 

Basically, Rhodes knew that there were many puppet reporters (most of them) who would willingly say or write whatever the Obama administration fed them in order to get the Iran deal through.

It takes a truly dimwitted egotist to brag to the media that he manipulated them and he was a top adviser to Obama.

One of the puppets Rhodes easily manipulated was Andrea Mitchell who is a renowned NBC newswoman who spends almost all her present time trashing Trump and defending Obama.  During the previous eight years, she essentially genuflected to Obama.  NBC pretends that Andrea is a knowledgeable, unbiased news reporter as she lobbies for Democratic policies.  This past week, she vouched for how excellent the Iran deal is.  How would she know?

Iran continues to pledge death to America and death to Israel.  The Iranians are a major sponsor of terrorism around the world, and along with Russia, they are protecting Syrian dictator Bashar Assad.  Why would anyone trust them?

Iran's economy had been collapsing under economic sanctions, so why did the Obama administration intentionally lift it up by giving it hundreds of billions of dollars?  The Obama administration knew that some of the money would be used to sponsor terrorism and released the cash anyway.  It seems that supposed legacy-building was more important than destroying terrorism.

Iran is using significant amounts of the newly available money to purchase weapons, including a large amount from Russia, which props up Iran when Russia's own economy is suffering.  Russia can use that money to continue its attack on Crimea and Ukraine or to defend Assad.  (Why would Putin have wanted Trump elected instead of continuing the policies of Obama?)

After the deal, Obama approved giving Iran 116 metric tons of uranium (obviously for "peaceful" purposes).  What makes the deal especially great is that the uranium comes from Russia.  Of course, Russia has access to more uranium today because the Obama administration, including Hillary Clinton, allowed Russia to get the American uranium in the first place.  (The media and Democrats should explain why Russia would have wanted Trump instead of Hillary, since Putin had much more flexibility under Obama.)

It is too bad that Obama didn't learn from recent history.  Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, broke up the Soviet Union, and brought down the Berlin Wall through strength, not capitulation.  He did not give them money to build themselves up.  He also did not cause a war to win an election or a re-election.  He won without shooting a bullet.  He scared them into complying. 

The media claimed that Reagan was extremely dangerous and would cause a world war.  They treated Reagan the same way they treat Trump today.  They essentially believe that leading from behind (which isn't leading) is safer than leading through strength.  They obviously haven't learned from history, either.

On Ben Rhodes, everyone should remember that he also was significantly involved in the fictional video "narrative" about Benghazi.  Instead of telling the truth that the attack was a planned terrorist attack, the Obama administration concocted the video story to protect its political power prior to the election.  Administration apparatchiks knew that the media, which was almost universally supporting Obama for president, would care more about electing Obama than what the truth was on why the four Americans died.  For them, not all lives matter when there is an agenda to push.

In summary, here are four simple questions.  Why would anyone believe that Iran wants to be a peaceful country?  Why does anyone believe that Andrea Mitchell is an unbiased journalist?  Why would anyone believe the fictional narrative-pusher Ben Rhodes on anything?  And why would Putin have wanted Trump instead of continuing the policies of Obama and Hillary that allowed him to do whatever he wanted? 

There are many stories about how, in the near future, so many fast food workers and other workers are in danger of losing their jobs to robots.  I believe that it is reporters who should have the most to fear.  It would take minimal programming to teach a robot to reprint Democrat talking points.