-- THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT FOR "THIS WEEK" ON JULY 19, 2015.
ANNOUNCER: Starting right now on ABC THIS WEEK, Trump firestorm -- what he's saying now that has some Republicans demanding he drop out.
Did he just go too far?
And terror in Tennessee -- the race this morning to find out more about the gunman and new details about his trip overseas and his troubled family life.
Did authorities miss any warning signs?
From ABC News, THIS WEEK WITH GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS begins now.
So many stories developing right as we come on the air.
Donald Trump will join us live momentarily.
First, ABC's Cecilia Vega on the new uproar.
CECILIA VEGA, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Donald Trump is at it again, unleashing his latest political firestorm on a new target -- this time, John McCain.
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He's not a war hero.
VEGA: Trump in Iowa going directly after the Arizona senator and former Navy fighter pilot who spent five-and-a-half years as a POW during the Vietnam War.
TRUMP: He is a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured, OK, I hate to tell you.
VEGA: And the reaction from fellow Republicans, fast and fierce. Nearly every GOP challenger running for the White House firing back.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When it comes to attacking an American hero, I'm going to call it out. I denounce Donald Trump for that.
VEGA: Democrats pouncing, too.
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: There's nothing funny about the hate he is spewing, the insults he's directed at a genuine war hero.
VEGA: Senator McCain so far staying silent, but his daughter Meghan took to Twitter, saying she is "horrified, designated. There are no words."
This is just the latest controversy for the brash billionaire.
TRUMP: They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists and some, I assume, are good people.
(END VIDEO TAPE)
Some now predicting, Martha, this could be the beginning of the end for Trump's candidacy.
RADDATZ: Thanks very much, Cecilia.
And let’s get straight to Donald Trump who joins us right now on the phone for his first interview since those controversial comments.
Thanks for joining us, Mr. Trump.
DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Good morning.
RADDATZ: Do you owe John McCain an apology?
TRUMP: No, not at all. Actually, if you look at Sharyl Attkisson’s report last night, four times she said I said perfectly, I said whatever it was, and it was absolutely fine. And she thought the press was covering me very -- very, very unfairly. And she stated that strongly. And I respect her as a reporter. And somebody that a lot of other people respect.
Also and very importantly I got a standing ovation, the biggest ovation they had all weekend, by far. When I left the room, it was a total standing ovation. It was wonderful to see. Nobody was insulted.
What happened is, later on, the Republican candidates, some of whom are registering 1 percent and zero, and they’re very upset that I’m leading the polls by actually a nice margin, they’re extremely upset and they were extremely when the Nevada numbers just came out and they’re through the roof too. They started attacking me --
RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, I want to -- let’s go back to this issue of John McCain, and you’re talking about the Sharyl Attkisson piece. You said he’s a war hero because he was captured, I believe perhaps he’s a war hero.
You do not think that is a war hero, captured or not?
TRUMP: I didn't say anything differently. And if you read -- and if you watch and take a look at what you have, I said nothing differently. I'm very disappointed in John McCain because the vets are horribly treated in this country. I'm fight for the vets. I've done a lot for the vets.
And the vets -- I've been going around to the campaign trail. They're treated like third-class citizens. He's done nothing to help the vets. And I will tell you, they are living in hell.
RADDATZ: You -- let me tell you this, what the national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, John Stroud (ph), said about your comments.
"For someone who never served a day in uniform to criticize the service and sacrifice of a combat-wounded veteran is despicable."
The founder and CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Paul Reikopf (ph), "an insult to everyone who has ever worn the uniform and to all Americans and an attack on one veteran's service is an attack on us all."
They apparently think you were criticizing Mr. McCain and saying he was not a war hero.
TRUMP: Well, maybe they don't speak to the same vets that I speak to. But I go all over the country and I speak to vets all the time. And they're absolutely having miserable times. It takes them six, seven days just to get into waiting in a reception room, just trying to get in to see a doctor. They're treated horribly. And everybody knows it and it --
RADDATZ: Let's go back here -- let's go back to your comment about John McCain --
TRUMP: -- and it's a scandal. And John McCain has done nothing to --
RADDATZ: There is -- Mr. Trump, I have covered the veterans issues for many, many years. Indeed, there are big troubles in the Veterans Administration.
TRUMP: -- the veterans except talk.
And by the way, this all started, Martha, when we had thousands and thousands of people in Phoenix, Arizona, and John -- who, by the way, are devastated by illegal immigration, something I'm very proud to have brought to the forefront. We had thousands of people and he said they're all crazies. He called them crazies.
And frankly, I think he owes them an apology.
RADDATZ: Let me talk about your language about him being captured.
You say you prefer those who aren't captured.
What could John McCain have done not to be captured?
TRUMP: Well, I do say this. People that fought hard and weren't captured and went through a lot, they get no credit. Nobody even talks about them. They're like forgotten. And I think that's a shame, if you want to know the truth.
People that were not captured that went in and fought, nobody talks about them. Those are heroes also.
RADDATZ: I think people do talk about those people as well.
But what did you mean --
TRUMP: I don't think so.
RADDATZ: -- what did you mean you -- what did you mean you prefer those who aren't captured?
TRUMP: I want to give them credit because, frankly, they don't get the credit. John McCain gets credit. He was elected a senator, et cetera, et cetera, and we'll give him all the credit. And as in the report, it said, from Sharyl Attkisson, four times, I said he is a hero. But you know, people choose little selective like you try to do. People choose little selective pieces. If you read what I say or if you watch what I say, which is even better, you'll say that there was nothing wrong. But the people that weren't captured are also heroes, Martha.
RADDATZ: I want to talk about you and your deferment.
How many deferments did you actually get?
And what were they for?
I believe you had student deferments and then a medical deferment.
TRUMP: I had student deferments, like many other people had, during the war or around the time of the war. I had a minor medical deferment for feet, for a bone spur of the foot, which was minor. I was then entered into the draft because if I would have gotten a different number, I could have been drafted.
I was fortunate, in a sense, because I was not a believer in the Vietnam War. That was another war that was a disaster for this country. Lives and money and it’s disgraceful what happened with the Vietnam War. I was not a fan of the Vietnam War. But I was entered into the draft and I got a very, very high draft number.
RADDATZ: That wasn’t until 1969.
TRUMP: Excuse me.
RADDATZ: The lottery wasn’t until 1969?
TRUMP: That’s right. I was entered --
TRUMP: Excuse me. Excuse me. I was entered into the lottery, the draft lottery. If I would have gotten a low number, I would have been drafted. I would have proudly served. But I got a number, I think it was 356. That’s right at the very end. And they didn’t get -- I don’t believe -- past even 300, so I was -- I was not chosen because of the fact that I had a very high lottery number.
RADDATZ: You -- there seems to be a pattern, Mr. Trump. When you’re criticized or attacked, you often respond with name-calling, using terms like “dummy”, “loser”, “total losers” on Twitter and elsewhere. You even demean some people’s physical appearance.
Is that something you would continue doing if you were president? Isn’t that language beneath the office of the president?
TRUMP: Oh, I don’t think -- look, when people attack me, I let them have it back. You say physical appearance. You know, it’s my hair but people are constantly attacking my hair. I don’t see you coming to my defense. I’m -- my hair is just fine, but I don’t see you coming to my defense. But if I say something about somebody else.
Yesterday, I mentioned somebody was saying, McCain’s a smart man. I said, really? He graduated last in his class at Annapolis, OK. So people laughed when I said it, but a lot of people don’t know that.
I’m very disappointed. I understand John McCain. I’ve backed John McCain; raised, I think, $1 million for John McCain when he let us down. He ran for president and lost to Obama, let us down. I wasn’t thrilled with that. But I will say what I want to say, and maybe that’s why I’m leading in the polls because people are tired of hearing politicians and pollsters telling the politicians exactly what to say.
And, believe me, this whole thing was brought up by a lot of the people that are competing against me currently that aren’t even registering in the polls because people are tired of them.
RADDATZ: Have you ever said anything you regret?
TRUMP: Yes, I have, on many occasions.
RADDATZ: Can you tell us a few of those? Not the birther issue.
TRUMP: No, I --
RADDATZ: Not the immigrant issue.
TRUMP: No, I wouldn’t do that. I wouldn’t do that, Martha. I wouldn’t do that. It’s not the appropriate time. But certainly I have said things that I could’ve held back. But not that often, surprisingly not that often, but certainly there have been occasions.
RADDATZ: So let me just get this clear. You are not apologizing. And you are certainly not pulling out of the race as some of your opponents have suggested.
TRUMP: Of course they’d love to have me do that because I’m leading the pack. I’m certainly not pulling out; I’m leading and I’m leading in many states. North Carolina just came in; I’m way in the lead there. Nevada, as I said, just came in. I’m way in the lead there. And, interestingly, in Nevada, I lead in Hispanics by a tremendous -- the Hispanics, I’m way into the 30s with Hispanics. Which I said, if I get the nomination, if I run for president, I will win the Hispanic vote, because I’ll be able to take jobs back from China, jobs back from Japan and Mexico, and everybody else that’s ripping us off on trade. And everybody knows that. And I will win the Hispanic vote.
RADDATZ: So you think this will actually help you? This is involving veterans and you heard what I said about those veterans groups. You still think this will help you in the polls?
TRUMP: I believe that I will do far more for veterans than John McCain has done for many, many years, with all talk no action. He’s on television all the time, talking, talking. Nothing gets done. You look at what’s happening to our veterans -- they’re being decimated, OK. So I will do far more for veterans than anybody. I’ll be able to build them new hospitals, I’ll be able to build them care centers. I’ll be able to help the veterans.
John McCain has failed. Because all you have to do is take a look -- what you report on all the time, take a look at the scandal at the Veterans’ Administration and the disastrous conditions under which our veterans have to live. And believe me, I built, with a small group, the Vietnam Memorial in downtown Manhattan. I know what it is to help people and I know what it is to help veterans.
RADDATZ: Thank you very much for joining us, Mr. Trump.
Now let's just in Democratic presidential contender, former senator, and Vietnam veteran Jim Webb. who, like John McCain, attended the U.S. Naval Academy.
Senator Webb, what's your reaction?
JIM WEBB (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, you know, I...
RADDATZ: You don't know where to start.
WEBB: That's a lot to react to in a quick minute or two.
But first of all, I believe if Donald Trump had taken the opportunity to serve our country, could have volunteered like a lot of people did, he would have a different feeling about these kinds of things that he's saying in his vituperative personal attacks. It's one thing to talk about issues, but when you're talking about military service you're talking about duty and honor and dignity.
And actually the comments that he made a few weeks ago about Mexican-Americans insulted a lot of our veterans. I have a couple of Mexican-American marine veterans who were in my unit in Vietnam who were really inflamed with these comments. One of them wrote a letter to Mr. Trump and said any time you want, come back and talk to us about military service. Oh, you didn't go.
Now, I'd known John McCain for a very long time, a great respect for him. I don't agree with him. You don't have to agree with him to understand the daily courage that it takes, and took, when people are prisoners of war undergoing uncertainties of whether they are going to come home or not -- and as you mentioned so well, how badly injured he was...
RADDATZ: Just quickly on that, you heard what Mr. Trump said. I said he was a war hero because he was captured. Was he backing off a little, or will that help at all, or just make it worse?
WEBB: Well, what he said was -- there's no excuse for it. And, you know, he can talk about veterans issues. We all care about veterans issues. And as I said, this goes to all veterans when they hear those sorts of things, because you're talking about the dignity of service when you say things like that. And there's no way to take away the courage, the daily courage people like John McCain faced in those years of incarceration.
RADDATZ: Thanks for joining us, Senator Webb. We'll have more with you later.
Plus, the roundtable weighs in on Trump's future, but now that developing story out of Tennessee, new details on the suspect in that terror attack that left five service members dead. Investigators are working 24/7 to find out everything they can about Muhammad Abdulazeez. How did he plan his rampage? Who did he meat on his recent trip to Jordan? I recently reported from that country on the effort to contain the ISIS threat and talk to numerous young men who supported the jihadist group.
Now, officials want to know if the Tennessee shooter had any links to ISIS. Here is senior justice correspondent Pierre Thomas.
PIERRE THOMAS, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Right now the phones and computer of Muhammad Abdulazeez are at the FBI laboratory in Quantico, Virginia, an urgent effort underway to find clues to his motive. He was not under FBI investigation, not under surveillance, and the FBI wants to know how he was able to operate under the radar.
They're looking at his travel, including the seven month trip to Jordan last year. Did he secretly go to other countries during that visit? And they want to find out if he was using online aliases to view violent propaganda or using encrypted communication to hide contacts with overseas radicals.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Law enforcement is asking is there we could have done? Is there more that we should have done? Were people aware that he was traveling to that region, were their signs that he was exhibiting in the community that were missed.
THOMAS: The FBI is under tremendous pressure with terrorism investigations in all 50 states, involving hundreds of suspected radicals, many of them thought to be ISIS sympathizers.
Just one week before the Chattanooga terror attack, the FBI director was sounding the alarm before congress.
JAMES COMEY, DIRECTOR, FBI: I cannot see me stopping these indefinitely.
THOMAS: And while we don't yet know if Abdulazeez has ties to ISIS, that’s the group that Comey fears is an eminent threat, specifically because of its unprecedented social media campaign targeting smartphones, computers and tablets.
COMEY: It buzzes in their pocket. So there is a device, almost a devil on their shoulder all day long saying "kill, kill, kill, kill."
THOMAS: A daily sophisticated multimedia campaign using all the advertising tricks.
Primary ISIS focus: directives to kill U.S. military. And it's working.
In recent months, at least a half dozen suspected ISIS sympathizers accused of plotting to kill U.S. soldiers here at home. In March, an Illinois national guardsman was accused of conspiring with his cousin to murder his fellow soldiers.
In April, an Ohio man charged after he traveled to Syria and was allegedly directed by ISIS to kill military personnel, men like Abdulazeez in their 20s. Difference: Abdulazeez got through.
For This Week, Pierre Thomas, ABC News, Washington.
RADDATZ: And joining us now, Congressman Michael McCaul, chair of the homeland security committee who is calling the shooting an ISIS inspired attack.
Chairman McCaul, can you tell us the latest that they've found out about Abdulazeez?
REP. MICHAEL MCCAUL, (R) TEXAS: Well, the FBI is currently doing a forensics examination on his computer, his cell phone, his travels to Jordan, which is right across the border from Syria. So we have the threat of foreign fighters, but we also have the threat over the internet, which is a new sort of threat that's out there, a new generation of terrorists as you heard Director Comey talk about. These internet directives from a cyber command if you will out of Syria to activate people in the United States to attack.
And what they are saying is attack military installations and attack police officers. And what we saw was one of the most deadliest attacks on American soil against our U.S. marines and an American sailor.
And this is case that we're most worried about. We have followed quite a few cases. We have over 60 cases that we've rolled up ISIS followers over the last year. That's more than one per week.
We have investigations into all 50 states. But what keeps us up at night are really the ones that we don't know about. And I'm afraid that this case falls into that category.
RADDATZ: Well, to that point, you had a naturalized citizens, numerous trips to Jordan, which border Syria as you said, a father who is on the terrorist watch list at one time, reports of Abuse, online writing. Shouldn't alarm bells have sounded?
MCCAUL: Well, 20/20 is hindsight. I commend the FBI and homeland for stopping so many terrorist plots in the United States.
But we will be examining this case. I know the FBI is investigating again his travel. The father was on a watchlist, was under an investigation that was closed. We'll be looking at all those details.
But you know this is, again, the new sort of threat that's out there over the internet that's very hard to stop. We have 200,000 ISIS tweets per day that hit the United States. And this is one of those threats that Director Comey talks about is getting so -- the chatter is so loud and the volume so high that it's a problem that's very hard to stop and disrupt in this country. It's something we've been warning about over the last year. And unfortunately we saw it take place in Chattanooga.
And Martha, if it can happen in Chattanooga, it can happen anywhere, anytime, anyplace, and that's our biggest fear.
RADDATZ: Mr. Chairman, you say 20/20 is hindsight -- or 20/20 hindsight -- but Tamerlan Tsarnaev had a background that should have raised alarms as well. And haven't we taken more measures since the Boston bombing to try to stop or track someone like this?
MCCAUL: Of course. And I was one of the biggest critics of that -- the way that was handled, that particular case that we saw fall through the cracks. You know, this is one we'll be conducting oversight and examining what happened.
But again, when we're stopping like we did the 4th of July plot that was imminent to blow up military at 4th of July parades, when we stopped at Garland, we stopped at -- we have again arrested -- there were 60 ISIS over the last year. Again, that's more than one per week. It's -- this is a very difficult counterterrorism challenge in the United States. And this is -- I met with the generals that conduct the war on terror.
And you know what, I think we need to take the fight over there a little stronger. And we need to hit these guys, these cyber commanders, that are sending these Internet directives out to attack, attack, attack in the United States and --
RADDATZ: -- I'm going to have to let you wrap up there, Chairman McCaul. Thank you very much for joining us. We'll be right back to look at these soft targets, like military recruiting centers, even cruise ships and shopping malls.
Are we doing enough to protect them?
RADDATZ (voice-over): Back in just a moment with a look at those soft targets.
How can we protect them against attack?
RADDATZ: A look at the growing memorial in Tennessee outside the recruiting center that was one of the sites of that horrific shooting rampage this week. This morning officials beefing up security at military locations nationwide. The strikes are a chilling remainder of just how many places are vulnerable to terror. Let's talk about that now with former FBI special agent Brad Garrett and retired general and former commander of U.S. Africa Command, Carter Ham.
Carter Ham, you, of course, served in Iraq as well and you certainly looked at the issues of force protection there. But you have advised the Pentagon on how to protect our service members as part of your investigation into the Ft. Hood massacre.
What do you think should happen now?
GEN. CARTER HAM, FMR. CMDR., AFRICOM: I think the right thing to do now is to do a comprehensive approach. There are, as you mentioned, Martha, thousands of U.S. military facilities that are embedded in the fabric of our society around the country. And it's also noteworthy that, very sadly, the four Marines and the Navy petty officer who were killed were on a federal installation, not in the civilian sector.
So how the shooter was able to gain access into that facility, I think, certainly merits further study.
RADDATZ: And one of the suggestions -- and some people are doing it now for National Guard members -- is to arm them. I think people don't realize sometimes that on these bases people aren't really armed except for some security people.
Do you think they should be armed?
Do you think they should be armed, Brad?
GARRETT: I think it's premature. It should be looked at. I know some state governors within their proper authority have directed that some of the National Guard members who are in facilities, recruiting facilities and the like, be armed.
That's not the case for federal recruiting stations. And there are matters of law and history that have to get involved.
But I think there are also other measures that can be taken, such as hardening the facilities, bulletproof glass in doors and the other.
And I would also mention that the federal, state and local law enforcement relationship with these military entities is very, very sound. And if there is an indication of increased threat, they're very quick to make sure that these sites are aware of that threat.
RADDATZ: And -- and Brad Garrett, they can harden those facilities. They can look at that closely. But it seems like almost everything else is a soft target.
GARRETT: Basically the world, Martha, is a soft target, except for these little bitty pockets. You can't really take a recruiting center and target harden it, because you then take away what it's there for, which is for us to walk in and decide if we want to join the military.
So a lot of this has -- we have to face the reality that some of us are just going to be vulnerable doing what we do day in and day out.
Now, having said that...
RADDATZ: And just quickly, because I asked you for -- do you think they should arm people at these recruiting stations?
GARRETT: I think we should not get in a big hurry to do that. You're talking about arming folks that are being -- going to be walking around in the civilian population. I see big issues with that.
RADDATZ: And -- and just very quickly, sum up what you think we can do, what we can do about soft targets.
GARRETT: The only thing you can do, Martha, about soft targets, is improve your intelligence. In other words, the shooting that happened in Chattanooga, we didn't know about.
Can that happen again?
Of course it can. But this has really got to be driven by what do we know in advance, because we're not going to lock down every facility, every mall in the country.
RADDATZ: Thank you.
And I know we'll have both of you back to talk about this a lot in the future.
Next, inside the historic Iran nuclear deal and the battle ahead on Capitol Hill. John Kerry and Israel's prime minister weighing in right here.
Plus, that wild week on the 2016 campaign trail. It's not just about Donald Trump.
RADDATZ: Part of the global reaction to the landmark nuclear deal with Iran, celebrations in Tehran earlier this week. I was there when the momentous deal was reached. We saw lots of joy and hope among the Iranian people, but there is also serious fear and concern here at home and around the world about that agreement.
A top critic, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, joins us shortly.
First, chief White House correspondent Jon Karl with America's lead negotiators, secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz.
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CORRESPONDENT: Could this be the beginning of a -- of a major change, though, in U.S.-Iran relations?
I mean we've (INAUDIBLE)...
JOHN KERRY, SECRETARY OF STATE: Well, there's no way to tell that. I mean it was not the purpose of the negotiations about a nuclear program. But we're prepared to test whether or not they're prepared to change their relationship in the region. And we certainly -- I think it would be diplomatic malpractice if we didn't keep our -- our doors open to possibilities.
KARL: This deal is going before the U.N. Security Council on Monday. You've heard some harsh criticism about that from Congress. Bob Corker, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said this is an affront to the American people. Ben Cardin, the top Democrat on the committee said this is presumptuous, to go to the U.N. before Congress.
Why are you going to the U.N. before you're going to the U.S. Congress with this deal?
KERRY: Well, we're not. What we did was negotiate with our P5-plus-1 partners, who are not subject to the Congress, that it cannot be implemented until after Congress has had a chance to vote.
KARL: But the bottom line is the U.N. is going to vote on this before the Congress is going to vote on this.
KERRY: Well, they have a right to do that, honestly. It's presumptuous of some people to suspect that France, Russia, China, Germany, Britain ought to do what the congress tells them to do.
They have a right to have a vote. But we prevailed on them to delay the implementation of that vote out of respect for our congress so we wouldn't be jamming them.
KARL: One of the most controversial provisions here is that in terms of these covert sites, Iran can delay for 24 days before inspectors get in there. You, Mr. Secretary, have said that there would be anywhere/anytime inspections. I mean, 24 days is not anywhere/anytime.
MONIZ: It was anytime/anywhere in the sense of a well defined process that would have a well defined conclusion in time. Three weeks for a process of this type is reasonable.
Most important, we are very confident in our ability to detect the vestiges of any nuclear work beyond 24 days.
KARL: So, even though they have nearly a month, they can't clean up what they're doing and hide what they're doing?
MONIZ: Yes, there had been various analogies to throwing things down toilets, et cetera. This is not so simple with nuclear materials. We have plenty of evidence of exquisite environmental sampling that will reveal the traces of nuclear work.
KARL: And I want to ask you, the lifting of the arms embargo -- so you're going to unleash 100 billion dollars worth of Iranian assets, and then within five years, they're going to be able to go on the open market arms embargo lifted. This is the premier state sponsor of terrorism.
KERRY: The United Nations resolution, which brought about the sanctions in the first place, said that if Iran will suspend its enrichment and come to negotiations, all the sanctions will be lifted. Now they've done more than just come to negotiations, they've actually negotiated a deal. And three of the seven nations thought they shouldn't, therefore, be held to any kind of restraint.
We prevailed and insisted, no, they have to be.
But we have ample other resolutions that allow us to hold them accountable for moving any weapons. President Obama is committed to doubling down on the enforcement of those measures. So I really think that a mountain is being made out of a mole hill here.
RADDATZ: Now for the other side, let’s bring in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He’s called the deal “an historic mistake”. He joins us now from Israel.
Prime Minister, we know you’re adamantly opposed to this deal. So, what do you do? Do you personally lobby Congress?
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTERADDATZ: Look, I think it’s very important for me as the prime minister of the one and only Jewish state to make our case against the deal that we believe endangers our security, our survival even, and the security of our -- of the Middle East and the world. I think that’s important. It’s a substantive disagreement. It should be examined on the substance.
RADDATZ: I know you have concerns especially about the 24 days to allow inspectors on Iranian nuclear sites and military sites. And yet, the U.S. Secretary of Energy says the U.S. is very confident in its ability to detect nuclear work beyond 24 days. Is he wrong?
NETANYAHU: Well, I think that -- I have respect for our intelligence services. They’re the best in the world -- Israel, the U.S. and the U.K. And yet, all three of us didn’t see for a long time the massive underground nuclear bunkers in Qom and in Natanz. We didn’t see the Syrian war kind of reactor, a nuclear reactor that was almost operational when we discovered.
So, I have full respect for intelligence. But it’s very thin ice. You simply, you can’t have -- speak with confidence about knowing a covert path to the bomb uninspected sites because you simply don’t know. Intelligence and the best intelligence in the world, you still very thin ice.
RADDATZ: What, to you, would have been an ideal agreement?
NETANYAHU: Dismantle for dismantle. Dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure for dismantling the sanctions. That was the original administration position and I think it was the right one. But, in fact, Iran actually gets both things. It gets to keep its nuclear infrastructure and it gets the full dismantling of sanctions in a very short time.
So the hardliners in Iran are actually going to come out strong because they’re getting everything they want. They’re getting a pathway down the line, within a decade or so, to the capacity to be a threshold state with practically zero breakout time to many nuclear bombs, and billions of dollars, hundreds of billions of dollars, which they’ll siphon off to their terror and war machine.
RADDATZ: Ash Cater is coming tomorrow. Is there anything he can say, the secretary of defense, that will satisfy you?
NETANYAHU: You know, everybody talks about compensating Israel. I guess the question you have to ask yourself is, if this deal is supposed to make Israel and our Arab neighbors safer, why should we be consecrated -- compensated with anything.
And furthermore, you know, how can you compensate a country, my country, against a terrorist regime that is sworn to our destruction and is going to get a path to nuclear bombs and billions of dollars to boot for its terror activities against us, against you, against everyone else. I think the right thing to do is not to do this bad deal.
RADDATZ: Let me ask you one final question. The military option. We know you’re not going to talk about specifics, but is there really any bomb, any military action that would delay Iran building a bomb for as long as this deal does?
NETANYAHU: As far as the military option, I never talk about it.
RADDATZ: Mr. Prime Minister, thank you.
NETANYAHU: Thank you.
RADDATZ: We’re right back with Senator Jim Webb and the roundtable breaks down the new Donald Trump firestorm.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
WEBB: I understand how our American military works. I understand foreign policy issues. And I would assure you, by the way, that if I were your president I would have never urged an invasion of Iraq.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RADDATZ: Senator Jim Webb speaking in Iowa on Friday night. That event the first time all five Democratic candidates have appeared on stage together. And Senator Webb is back with us now.
I want to go to the shooting in Chattanooga. You were a marine, you saw many men die. Do you agree that recruiters should have -- I think I know you do agree that recruiters should have guns. They should be allowed to carry...
WEBB: Well, they should have the means to defend themselves. And this is dramatically changed since 9/11. And there's a basic logic here: if we don't know who these shooters are going to be, and we do know that one of their targets that they're focusing on are military people in uniform, then it's just logical that we should provide them a means to defend themselves if they become under any sort of attack like this.
That doesn't mean you have to turn a recruiting office into a bunker, as -- that was being discussed before, but...
RADDATZ: But these are in civilian areas. I think that's the difference there. You know, they're in strip malls. They're...
WEBB: Well, you know, we don't take firearms away from police officers. There should be some means for these people to defend themselves.
I had a long talk with the chief of staff for the army after the Ft. Hood incident, which also was on a military base. There was not one military person in that gathering that had a firearm.
I grew up in the military. Firearms were normal in the situations when I was growing up.
By the time they called the police to get in there to help them, they had 13 dead people.
RADDATZ: How do you see that playing out? I know one of the things we talked about with the military is they're not police officers. The MPs are police officers. So how do you see a scenario playing out like that if people were armed inside well --
WEBB: Well, like I say, it's -- this -- I'm not talking about turning these different centers and bases into fire bases. But at the same time, they should have the ability to defend themselves in some way.
And the -- try and think of it the other way around. How would you or I like to be sitting there in one of these chairs, on -- you know, with a -- in a profession of arms, familiar with weapons, waiting to see if someone's going to come in and do harm to you and not have any ability --
RADDATZ: I'm going to leave that to you.
I want to move to the Iran deal. You say you have a lot of concerns and we're going to read it.
What concerns you most?
And if you were still in the Senate, would you vote against it?
WEBB: Well, first, I have been a proponent of these sorts of approaches toward rogue and rogue regimes. I worked with Vietnam in terms of normalizing relations there. I led the change in Burma in terms of opening up that regime.
I just have very serious concerns here. Number one is even if all of these processes worked -- and I respect the people who put them together -- at the end of 10 years, what are we going to have? Have we now given our endorsement of the fact that Iran will eventually obtain nuclear weapons?
And then secondly, the process beginning now, I think, is -- we've got to be very careful in terms of how it affects the strategic balance in the region in terms of signals that we send, not just in terms of who's got how many conventional weapons.
RADDATZ: And I hate to say be quick on this because it's your entire campaign. But we'll let you go campaign.
How do you think your prospects look for being president?
And why do you want to be president? You stayed in the Senate on term.
WEBB: Well, I've had four different periods of public service in my life. And I've been able to move out of public service for a while and look at things differently. So four year -- one term in the Senate is a term and a half of a presidency. Wasn’t a short period of time.
I've had five years in the Pentagon, one as --
RADDATZ: So why do you want to be president?
WEBB: I'm very concerned about where we're going in this country. And I think we're going to see some dramatic changes in terms of how we approach our economic fairness issues and we really need a commander in chief who understands how to deal with these issues.
RADDATZ: Thank you very much for joining us, Senator Webb.
RADDATZ (voice-over): Ahead, will Donald Trump keep his lead in the polls after this latest firestorm?
And Obama's big sell (ph), will Congress accept the Iran nuke deal? We're back after this from our ABC stations.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: I believe that I will do far more for veterans than John McCain has done for many, many years with all talk, no action. He's on television all the time, talking, talking; nothing gets done.
You look at what's happening to our veterans. They're being decimated, OK? So I will do far more for veterans than anybody. John McCain has failed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
RADDATZ (voice-over): Some of Donald Trump's comments causing that new uproar. Let's bring in the roundtable.
"Weekly Standard" editor Bill Kristol, ESPN's LZ Granderson, former Michigan governor Jennifer Granholm who's the co-chair of Super PAC Priorities USA and a Hillary Clinton supporter, and ABC's chief White House correspondent, Jon Karl.
And a special welcome to LZ and Governor Granholm, here for the first time as ABC News contributors. We are happy to have had you before many, many times.
I want to start with our Jon Karl, however.
Will this hurt him?
Is this different (ph)? Is this a turning point?
JONATHAN KARL, ABC NEWS CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, this is what opened the floodgates of Republicans to finally come out and condemn Donald Trump.
But look, he's content to lead in the polls with 15-17 percent and I'll tell you, Martha, there are two candidates that Trump unequivocally helps in this race, one now, the other in the future.
The first is Jeb Bush because he becomes the vessel for all of the anti-Bush anger in the party and it's in somebody who is clearly unelectable, will not get the nomination.
And the second is Hillary Clinton. You heard him again, yesterday, say that he will not rule out running as a third-party candidate if that happens, it guarantees Hillary Clinton victory.
RADDATZ: And, Bill Kristol, I think it was just yesterday you did a brief interview with ABC News, calling him older, wiser, richer Donald Trump would be better than Hillary.
Still think that?
BILL KRISTOL, "THE WEEKLY STANDARD": I think he's still older and richer than Hillary Clinton.
KRISTOL: Though if she gives a few more speeches maybe she'll catch up. But, no, I don't think that anymore actually. I think it's one thing, he was a controversial character who said some useful things, I think, and brought some people into the Republican tent. But he jumped the shark (ph) yesterday.
He said to me -- no, seriously --
RADDATZ: -- to you --
KRISTOL: -- yes, seriously, no. I mean, he insulted every veteran, every -- certainly every veteran who's a POW, which is -- with these insane statements about how it's your fault that you're captured or shot down. And with total lack of respect for not just John McCain -- that I think other people made this point, Jim Webb, made this point -- for other people's military service and sacrifice.
So I'm finished with Donald Trump. And I don’t think it's going to -- he'll -- and I don't think -- I don't think he'll stay up in the polls, incidentally. Republican primary voters are pro-respect the military. And he showed disrespect for the military.
RADDATZ: LZ, did his explanation do anything, change anything?
LZ GRANDERSON, ESPN: Explanation? I thought it was just more of a -- just furthermore branding sort of promotion.
I mean, we all know he's not actually trying to be President of the United States. He's just trying to stir the pot to keep his brand out there. And that's just what he's been doing.
I'm a little --
RADDATZ: But has he gone too far this time?
GRANDERSON: Well, I'm amazed that we think this is the moment that he's gone too far. I mean, he -- on television and literally (INAUDIBLE) an entire race of people. Why wasn’t that the shark that got jumped? Why did it take the attack of John McCain to get people to get so upset that Republicans start tweeting and denouncing? When he went there and said, well, I like some of the Mexicans but the rest of them are a bunch of rapists and criminals?
I mean, that, to me, was a shark jumping moment.
RADDATZ: And Governor, the Democrats do what? Just sit back and let this play out?
JENNIFER GRANHOLM (D), FORMER GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN: Well, I was going to say before yesterday, just put up your feet and break out the popcorn. But I do think that he really went too far.
And I agree with LZ, that he had gone too far already and that this really, I think, is a signal of this sinister thread that runs through a lot of the far right and Tea Party, this feeling like those who are different are not one of us, that it's frightening for many in the sort of old, older white Americans who might be following him and who are angry, who may feel threatened by this -- by immigrants. I worry about that sinister thread. And I'll be interested to see whether, in fact, there is a -- you know, a diminution in his rankings. Because if it still stays high, then I think there's a lot more that the Republican Party has to figure out.
RADDATZ: And let's look at those rankings first, Jon. We've got in the latest ABC News "Washington Post" poll, obviously, before these comments, Trump still had a 61 percent unfavorable rating, although his favorability has doubled since May, despite -- despite...
KARL: -- your favorability is 33 percent and that is a doubling, by the way.
RADDATZ: So -- so what happens going forward?
In a week from now, if we took another poll, what do you think that would say?
KARL: Well, I still think there is a portion of that electorate that is extremely angry. I don't doubt that it will go down a degree on this. But look what happened in the room when he made those comments. One thing he was right about in the interview he used it with him, is he did get a standing ovation. And he was enthusiastically applauded minutes after saying what he said about John McCain in that room.
Now, by the way, the other thing he said is he was asked, can you tell us -- do you ever ask God for forgiveness. This was a -- this was a conservative religious right (INAUDIBLE)...
RADDATZ: That was controversial.
RADDATZ: In that room was...
KARL: And he couldn't come up with a -- with -- well, I don't really know. I kind of leave God out of that. I think he kind of misunderstands Evangelicalism.
RADDATZ: OK, Bill, we -- we also saw Scott Walker officially jump into the race this week. He's still doing well in the polls, both in Iowa and nationally.
What's his vulnerability?
KRISTOL: I don't -- I (INAUDIBLE)...
RADDATZ: Maybe nothing?
KRISTOL: Yes, I think he's a strong candidate, a Midwestern governor who governed successfully, won three times in four years in a -- in a state that President Obama carried twice in that same period. And I think that Trump will go away. I don't buy the argument that there is a huge number of un -- Jennifer wants to make it seem like this huge chunk of the Republican Party is...
KRISTOL: -- vitriolic.
GRANHOLM: I just think that there is...
KRISTOL: It was the Democrats yesterday...
GRANHOLM: -- there is a number...
KRISTOL: -- who hooted at a huge left-wing convention, who hooted Bernie Sanders and O'Malley, Governor O'Malley, off the stage for not being left-wing enough. Governor O'Malley said black lives matter, white lives matter, all lives matter. Unacceptable in the Democratic Party.
RADDATZ: I -- I want to move on to Iran since I just got back from Iran...
RADDATZ: -- it's a particularly interesting to me.
LZ, you Tweeted this week questioning Republicans like Senator Tom Cotton, who criticizing the deal. You said, "All about 6's -- Senator Cotton, who has been in office for like six months, takes on the six nations that have been working on this Iran deal since 2006."
Is there like a 666 thing...
GRANDERSON: It was (INAUDIBLE)...
RADDATZ: -- going there?
GRANDERSON: I just thought it was kind of curious that the number sixes kept appearing. And...
GRANDERSON: And the way that the conversation continues to happen, especially domestically, I spent a couple of weeks in London. I was there for ESPN covering Wimbledon. And I can tell you that the conversation that's happening abroad in terms of this deal is totally different than the way that it's being promoted here or talked about here.
Here, it's all through the lens of America. It's all through Congress, what Congress has to say.
Abroad, it's about what's in it for Russia, what's in it for China, how does it impact the U.K.?
It's a lot more about the breadth j the width of this deal and not just domestically.
And I think that's important as we have this conversation here. This isn't about whether or not Obama negotiated a bad deal. This is about whether or not the six nations involved in the conversation found this deal to be advantageous versus the current status quo. That's the conversation we need to be having.
KRISTOL: Do you think Congress doesn't have a right to say -- to weigh in?
GRANDERSON: No, no, no. Part of the conversation is how Congress feels about it. But Congress isn't the leader of...
KRISTOL: I'm sorry...
GRANDERSON: -- the U.K., is not the leader of...
KRISTOL: Well, that's right.
GRANDERSON: It's not the (INAUDIBLE)...
KRISTOL: So Congress should (INAUDIBLE)...
GRANDERSON: -- of Russia.
KRISTOL: -- on whether America...
KRISTOL: -- goes along with this deal.
GRANDERSON: -- for -- for America.
GRANDERSON: But as Americans, we need to have a conversation about well, who else is impacted by this and what are their thoughts on this, as well, because that should influence us to have an intelligent conversation about it and not just one that's solely based upon us.
RADDATZ: So let's quickly move to the Hill very quickly.
Governor, do you think it -- what happens on the Hill?
GRANHOLM: Well, I -- I do think that people should actually take a look at Hillary Clinton's statement on this, because this is not the end of the story. She says it's a beginning, it's a first step. There are a lot of other arrows in the diplomatic quiver to -- to constrain Iran's bad behavior in other areas. This is one thing.
And the goal was to reduce Iran's ability to get the bomb and they've done that.
KRISTOL: And give them $140...
RADDATZ: And Jonathan Karl...
KRISTOL: -- billion...
RADDATZ: I've got -- I'm going to give you 10 seconds, because you know what that means.
KARL: Well, I will tell you that I -- the White House thinks that they can keep this disapproval resolution from passing the Congress by getting at least 41 "no" votes in the Senate. That means they can hold most of the Democrats.
I don't know if that's the case, but they have -- they're off to a good start.
RADDATZ: And -- and what would this do to President Obama's foreign policy legacy?
You've got 10 seconds.
GRANHOLM: Yes. I think it is a tremendous legacy, because it shows that America can lead with allies in strategic coalitions. It doesn't have to be American unilateralism and cowboyism.
RADDATZ: OK, thanks, all of you, very much.
We'll keep an eye on it. We may not know the results of it for quite a long time.
Finally this morning, the heroes killed in the Tennessee terror attack -- four Marines and one sailor. Some of these brave men survived wars overseas only to tragically fall here at home.
We remember these remarkable Americans.
RADDATZ: And please remember.
That's all for us today.
Thanks for sharing part of your Sunday with us.
Check out "World News Tonight."
And we'll see you back here next week.
Have a great day.