Vice President J.D. Vance took the podium at the White House on Thursday morning, June 18, 2026, for a wide-ranging solo press briefing — his first as the lead face of the administration’s case for the newly signed U.S.-Iran Memorandum of Understanding. With oil markets recovering, gas prices ticking below $4, and Republican critics on Capitol Hill raising alarms, Vance delivered a confident, sometimes combative performance built around a single argument: the United States holds all the leverage, and this deal — whatever its imperfections — is structured so America wins either way. Assistance from Claude AI.
Participants
| Name | Title |
|---|---|
| J.D. Vance | Vice President of the United States |
| White House press corps reporters | Various outlets (see notable questions below) |
| Mary Margaret (unnamed outlet — Daily Wire) | Reporter |
| “Cara” | Reporter (outlet not identified) |
| “Rob” | Reporter (outlet not identified) |
| “Mave” | Reporter (outlet not identified) |
| Jordan Conradson | Reporter, Gateway Pundit |
| Steven Kapusta | Reporter (outlet not identified) |
Note: Most questioners were not identified by name or outlet in the transcript. Only Vance was an identified speaker.
Background: What Is the MOU, and How Did We Get Here?
Before diving into the briefing, a quick primer for readers who’ve lost track of a fast-moving story.
The 2026 Iran War began on February 28, when the United States and Israel launched a joint military campaign against Iran. The stated goals included destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons program and its ability to threaten the region. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the strikes. The war lasted roughly 38 days of intense combat before an April ceasefire — though fighting in Lebanon between Israel and the Iran-backed group Hezbollah has continued.
The Strait of Hormuz — a narrow chokepoint between Iran and Oman through which roughly 20% of the world’s oil normally flows — was effectively closed by Iran early in the war. The U.S. imposed its own blockade of Iranian ports in response. The result was a massive global oil price shock, with gas prices in the U.S. surging to a peak of $4.56 per gallon.
The MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) is a preliminary peace framework, not a final deal. It was signed electronically on Sunday, June 15, and formally signed by President Trump at the Palace of Versailles on June 17. Iran’s parliament speaker signed for the Iranian side. The MOU sets a 60-day window — starting June 18, according to Vance — for technical negotiations toward a final agreement. It immediately reopens the Strait of Hormuz to toll-free commercial shipping for 60 days and lifts the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports.
With that context, here is what Vance said — and how it holds up.
Iran MOU: The “Win-Win” Argument
What Vance Said
Vance opened with a string of good-news headlines, then laid out what he called the structural logic of the deal.
On immediate results: last night, 12.5 million barrels of oil moved through the Strait of Hormuz — the highest since the start of the conflict. Iran did not fire on any ships in the strait for the second consecutive night. CENTCOM allowed more than a dozen ships to pass through the naval blockade.
On the overall framework, Vance framed the deal as a no-lose proposition for the U.S.:
“If the Iranians don’t change their behavior, their military and their nuclear program is still destroyed. If they do change their behavior, then they are going to have a transformative relationship with the Middle East.”
He repeatedly stressed that Iran receives no money from the United States under any scenario, and that all economic benefits — sanctions relief and access to frozen assets — are contingent on verified behavioral changes. He accused certain media outlets and critics of misrepresenting the MOU by suggesting Iran gets benefits upfront.
Fact-Check: Did Iran’s Nuclear Program Get “Completely Destroyed”?
⚠️ MISLEADING. Vance said on multiple occasions that Iran’s nuclear program “has been completely destroyed” and that “their capacity for enrichment is still destroyed.”
The reality is more complicated. U.S. and international assessments confirm severe — but not complete — damage. The above-ground enrichment plant at Natanz was destroyed, and centrifuges there were likely severely damaged or destroyed. However, the deeply buried Fordow enrichment facility sustained only about 30% damage, according to assessments, and its core may be intact (Congressional Research Service, 2026). The IAEA has been unable to conduct any inspections inside Iran since Tehran expelled inspectors on February 28, 2026, meaning no independent verification is possible. DNI Tulsi Gabbard testified in March 2026 that Iran had not resumed enriching uranium — but that is not the same as the program being “completely destroyed.” A more accurate characterization is that Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity has been substantially degraded, with the key deep-bunker facility at Fordow remaining a significant unknown.
Fact-Check: Is There Really “Not a Single Penny” Going to Iran from the U.S.?
✅ ACCURATE — with important context. Vance is correct that the MOU does not authorize any direct U.S. payment to Iran. The economic benefits Iran stands to receive under a full deal would primarily come through two channels: (1) lifting of U.S. sanctions, allowing Iran to sell oil and reintegrate into global financial markets; and (2) the unfreezing of Iranian assets currently held abroad — money that belongs to Iran, not to U.S. taxpayers. Vance estimated those frozen assets at somewhere between $100 billion and $200 billion, most held in Gulf states and European accounts. Additionally, a $300 billion reconstruction investment figure cited in the MOU is expected to come from Gulf Arab states and private investors, not the U.S. Treasury. The key caveat: unlocking Iran’s own frozen assets is still a significant economic benefit, even if it’s not a U.S. “gift.”
The 60-Day Clock and MOU Timeline
What Vance Said
A reporter asked the “housekeeping” question of when exactly the 60-day negotiating window officially began. Vance confirmed: the clock starts today, June 18. He explained that while the MOU was technically signed on Sunday, the time-zone difference meant it was signed “today, Iran time,” and the parties agreed to start counting from the 18th.
He also addressed the chaotic rollout — conflicting public statements about when the text would be released, an Axios report questioning whether it had been signed at all, and the eventual signing at Versailles.
“I don’t think our public messaging has been chaotic. I think dealing with a fractured Iranian system where communication isn’t great is just sometimes something that we don’t fully appreciate.”
He revealed that Iran had asked the U.S. not to release the text until Friday, June 20 — a request Vance said he didn’t fully understand but complied with temporarily. He speculated that Iran may have wanted time to prepare a Farsi translation that required State Department verification before release.
Fact-Check: Was the Rollout Really Not Chaotic?
⚠️ MISLEADING. The public record tells a messier story than Vance acknowledged. On June 15, reporters were told the MOU text would be released within 48 hours. The President then said “after Friday.” Axios reported a signing had not occurred at the time the White House said it had. The formal signing ultimately happened at Versailles on June 17. While the underlying explanation Vance offered — Iranian requests for delay, translation logistics — is plausible, describing the public communications as non-chaotic is a stretch. Senate Republicans reported being kept in the dark about the deal’s contents for days (New Republic, 2026).
Nuclear Safeguards: What Exactly Did Iran Promise?
What Vance Said
Several reporters pressed hard on the specifics: If the deal’s enforceability depends on Iranian behavior, what exactly has Iran committed to?
Vance outlined a framework built around action, not words:
- Iran has promised not to enrich uranium.
- Iran has promised to allow international inspectors back in to oversee the destruction of its highly enriched uranium stockpile.
- Iran has promised steps toward a formal inspections and enforcement regime.
- Iran has not yet received any sanctions relief or unfrozen assets — and won’t until it demonstrates compliance.
On what Vance called “gentlemen’s agreements” referenced by a senior U.S. official — some of which are not fully in writing — Vance offered a revealing answer:
“Words don’t matter, ladies and gentlemen, we’re about verification.”
He framed the written-or-unwritten distinction as largely irrelevant because the deal’s structure rewards conduct, not promises. Economic benefits unlock in direct proportion to verified Iranian actions — what he called “a dial.”
Context for Readers
This is the crux of the deal’s controversy. Critics, including several Republican senators, note that the MOU itself does not specify the length of the moratorium on enrichment, the precise timeline for destroying the enriched stockpile, or the detailed inspection regime — leaving those details to be negotiated in the 60-day technical talks. Iran’s position, as stated publicly by Iranian officials, includes language about retaining some rights to enrichment — a significant discrepancy with the American description of the deal.
Ballistic Missiles: A Major Dispute
What Vance Said
A reporter raised one of the briefing’s sharpest factual disputes: Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in March 2026 that eliminating the threat of Iran’s short-range ballistic missiles was a goal of the war. U.S. intelligence has assessed — as reported by the New York Times — that Iran still retains roughly 70% of its pre-war ballistic and cruise missile stockpile. The reporter asked: did the administration abandon that objective?
Vance pushed back hard, calling the intelligence assessment “an anonymously leaked” report that was “not with context, and that frankly is not accurate.” He argued that the relevant measure is not the number of missiles (the “bullets”) but the number of launchers (the “guns”) and the trained teams capable of operating them — and that Iran’s ability to actually launch missiles has been “substantially degraded.”
On Trump’s evolution away from demanding Iran fully dismantle its missile program, Vance explained it as a matter of fairness: you cannot demand any country surrender its right to self-defense. Iran can retain some missiles, just not ones capable of threatening “the entire world.”
Fact-Check: The 70% Intelligence Estimate
⚠️ MISLEADING DISMISSAL. Vance’s characterization of the 70% figure as an “anonymously leaked” and “not accurate” claim is an overstatement. The assessment was initially reported in the New York Times on May 12, 2026, based on classified U.S. intelligence. Multiple subsequent sources — including the Philadelphia Inquirer, the New Arab, and defense analysis outlets — corroborated the core finding: Iran has retained approximately 70% of its mobile missile launchers and approximately 70% of its prewar missile stockpile (New York Times, May 2026; The Defense News, 2026). While CENTCOM Commander Admiral Brad Cooper told the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 14 that the reports were “not accurate,” he did not offer a counter-figure. The administration’s own pivot toward arguing that launcher capacity — not raw missile count — is the key metric appears designed to reframe a finding that undercuts earlier “decimated military” claims. The intelligence community’s assessment, as best as can be determined from public reporting, is real and substantive.
Iran’s Ballistic Missiles and the Self-Defense Question
What Vance Said
Vance also addressed Trump’s public shift on Iran’s missiles — the president suggested at the G7 that Iran having some missiles is acceptable, given that surrounding countries also have them.
Vance explained the current U.S. position: Iran may retain defensive missiles, but the final deal must prohibit Iran from building the kind of missiles that can “broadly threaten the entire world.” The goal is ensuring Iran cannot rebuild its nuclear weapons capacity for “many, many years.”
On Gulf Arab partners: Vance pointed to the fact that Israel and the Gulf states feel “substantially safer today from the Iranian missile threat than they did before” — and argued this is the relevant metric of success, not raw missile counts.
The Strait of Hormuz: Tolls, Governance, and What Comes Next
What Vance Said
The MOU guarantees 60 days of toll-free passage through the Strait of Hormuz. After that, the MOU calls for a dialogue between Iran, Oman, and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) to determine the future governance of the strait.
A reporter noted that a senior U.S. official acknowledged Iran is expected to “push aggressively” for the right to charge tolls. The reporter asked how hard the U.S. would fight to prevent this.
Vance was firm: international waterways should be free of tolls, full stop. He noted this is the U.S. position, and that if a final deal doesn’t reflect it, “there’s not going to be a final deal.” He also corrected a minor factual error in the question, noting the MOU involves Iran, Oman, and the GCC — not just Iran and Oman.
Fact-Check: Is Iran Already Pushing for Strait Tolls?
✅ ACCURATE. Al Jazeera and other outlets reported that Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson confirmed Iran would “charge fees for services” in the Strait of Hormuz going forward — directly contradicting the U.S. position that the waterway must remain permanently toll-free (Al Jazeera, 2026). This is an active and unresolved tension in the deal.
Gas Prices, Oil Markets, and Economic Claims
What Vance Said
Vance opened the briefing with specific economic claims: 12.5 million barrels of oil through the Strait of Hormuz overnight (a conflict-era high); oil prices “nearly at their level from the pre-war conflict”; and gas prices falling below $4 per gallon for the first time since the conflict began.
When pressed on when Americans might see gas reach $3, Vance demurred: “I’m not an economist, and I think even the economists would get this wrong.” He said the 65-cent national drop in gas prices was real and that further relief was coming.
Fact-Check: Gas Below $4 — True
✅ ACCURATE. AAA confirmed on June 18, 2026, that the national average for regular gasoline fell to $3.999 per gallon — the lowest since March 30, and the first time below $4 since before the conflict escalated in March (AAA, 2026; CBS News, 2026). At its peak in late May, the national average hit $4.56.
Fact-Check: The “65 Cents” Drop Claim — Partially Accurate
⚠️ MISLEADING. Vance cited “about $.65 a gallon on the national average” as the drop. The peak-to-current decline is approximately $.57 (from $4.56 to $3.99). AAA data confirms prices fell about $.52 compared to one month ago. Vance’s $.65 figure is slightly higher than supported by available data, though the broader claim of significant relief is accurate.
Fact-Check: Oil Prices “Nearly at Their Pre-War Level”
⚠️ MISLEADING. WTI crude was approximately $67 per barrel on February 27, 2026 — the last trading day before the conflict (Discovery Alert, 2026). As of June 18, WTI trades around $76-77 per barrel, still about 13-15% above pre-war levels. Vance’s “nearly” qualifier softens the claim, but prices remain noticeably above where they started, even if dramatically below the war-peak of ~$120 per barrel (CNBC, 2026).
Sanctions Relief, Frozen Assets, and the “Lifeline” Question
What Vance Said
Multiple reporters probed the same fundamental tension: if Iran is being allowed to sell oil right now, isn’t that a concrete economic benefit before it has done anything to earn it?
Vance offered a two-part response. First, he argued that oil sanctions were already ineffective — Iran was selling oil anyway, through shadow markets, “plenty of oil without any discount.” What actually stopped Iranian oil sales was the naval blockade, not the sanctions. Lifting the blockade to reopen the Strait merely returns things to the pre-conflict status quo. Second, he argued that lifting sanctions provides the U.S. an advantage: it will now be able to see where Iran’s financial flows actually go, since lifting sanctions moves Iran out of “shadow banking.”
On frozen assets — estimated at somewhere between $100-200 billion — Vance was categorical: not a dollar will be unfrozen until Iran performs under the deal. He flatly denied reports that Qatar had released billions in Iranian assets, calling those reports “just fundamentally wrong.”
Fact-Check: Were Sanctions Really “Ineffective”?
✅ LARGELY ACCURATE. This is one of Vance’s more substantive arguments. Pre-war, Iran had been largely selling oil at full price to China and India despite sanctions, because enforcement had weakened significantly. The naval blockade was the more economically decisive move. Economic analysts and oil market reports corroborate that Iran had successfully evaded much of the sanctions regime through alternative financial channels. Calling them fully “ineffective” overstates, but the core point that the blockade — not the sanctions — was the real chokepoint has support.
Fact-Check: Obama JCPOA “Gave Them Over $1 Billion of American Money”
⚠️ MISLEADING. In comparing this deal favorably to the 2015 Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), Vance said: “The Obama deal gave them over $1 billion of American money. This deal gives them $0.” The claim requires unpacking. The JCPOA itself did not give Iran any U.S. taxpayer money — it gave Iran access to its own frozen foreign assets, which most estimates placed in the range of $50-100 billion in liquid, accessible funds. Separately, the Obama administration paid Iran $1.7 billion in 2016 — but this was a settlement of an Iranian claim from a pre-1979 arms deal, not a gift of American money (FactCheck.org, 2019; Newsweek, 2023). Vance’s “$1 billion” figure is actually lower than the actual $1.7 billion settlement, which is an odd undercount given that the talking point typically inflates the number. The broader framing of the JCPOA as the U.S. “giving” Iran money misrepresents the nature of sanctions relief.
This Deal vs. the Obama JCPOA: Key Differences
What Vance Said
Vance laid out what he called the most important differences between the Trump MOU/final deal and the Obama-era JCPOA:
Structural/negotiating position:
– In 2015, the U.S. negotiated with Iran while Iran had an intact, advanced nuclear program. The U.S. was, in Vance’s words, “bribing” Iran to pause it.
– Now, the U.S. negotiates from a position where Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has been severely damaged. The U.S. is asking Iran to prove it won’t rebuild — a fundamentally different leverage position.
Regional support:
– Gulf Arab states hated the JCPOA because they believed it empowered Iran as a regional actor. They supported the current deal because it weakens Iran. Vance cited this as the most important endorsement.
Substantive policy differences (Vance’s claims):
– The JCPOA allowed enrichment; the Trump final deal will not.
– The JCPOA allowed accumulation of weapons-grade material; the Trump deal requires destruction of that stockpile.
– The Obama deal involved over $1 billion in U.S. funds; this deal involves $0.
Context
The enrichment prohibition is the most contested of these claims, given that Iran has publicly stated it views its enrichment rights differently than the U.S. description of the deal. Whether a final deal actually bans all enrichment — or merely limits it — is one of the key issues to be resolved in the 60-day technical talks.
The “Fall Guy” Moment and The View Comparison
What Vance Said
One of the briefing’s most memorable exchanges came when a reporter noted that President Trump had joked — or perhaps not joked — that he would blame Vance if the Iran talks went sideways. Was Vance worried about being made the fall guy?
Vance’s response drew laughter and set Twitter ablaze:
“I have seen some progressive criticisms of me personally saying, what experience does the Vice President of the United States have with hostile, high-stakes negotiations? And I would point those progressive critics to the fact that, just two days ago, I spent over an hour on The View. So I actually have great experience in very hostile negotiations. Joy Behar is way tougher than the Iranians, and she and I are best friends now.”
Lebanon, Hezbollah, and the Israel Tension
What Vance Said
The Lebanon portion of the MOU requires Hezbollah to stop firing rockets and drones at Israel, and Israel to stop striking civilian population centers in Lebanon. Vance acknowledged the ceasefire has been “a little messy” — a direct quote from Trump, who reportedly said a ceasefire in that region just means “they’re shooting a little bit less at each other.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio is the designated point person managing the Lebanon dimension, Vance said.
On Israel: Vance said the administration speaks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or someone in his government “pretty much every day.” He was notably sharp in his language about members of Netanyahu’s cabinet who have publicly attacked the MOU and Trump personally:
“Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time. And he happens to be the head of state of the world’s superpower. If I was in the Cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world.”
He added a pointed economic reminder: over the last three months, two-thirds of the defensive weapons that protected Israel’s homeland were “built by American hands and paid for by American tax dollars.”
Fact-Check: Is Netanyahu Really “Fuming”?
ℹ️ UNVERIFIABLE FROM THIS BRIEFING. Axios reported that Netanyahu was “fuming” over the MOU, and the Gateway Pundit reporter asked Vance about this directly. Vance said the Axios report was “not reflective of the conversations that I have had with him” — but acknowledged Netanyahu might be saying different things to different people. Separately, Vance confirmed the administration is asking for closer coordination with Israel after Israeli strikes hit civilian areas in Beirut that he called “not acceptable.”
Congressional Relations: FISA, the SAVE America Act, and Briefing Congress on the Deal
What Vance Said
On the Iran deal and Congress: Vance said the administration spoke with James Braid, the White House’s head of the Office of Legislative Affairs (OLA), and plans a formal congressional briefing soon. Congress received the signed document the morning of the briefing. He noted the House was out of session. The administration holds an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that temporary sanction waivers do not require congressional approval under the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act.
On the SAVE America Act and FISA: A reporter asked about Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s statement that attaching the SAVE America Act to FISA reauthorization is “unrealistic.” Vance pushed back:
“Why don’t we try? Why don’t we try and at least force people to vote against it?”
He argued that making senators go on record against voter ID — which he said the “American people love” — is a worthwhile exercise politically, regardless of outcome.
Fact-Check: What’s Actually Happening with SAVE Act and FISA?
✅ CONTEXT NEEDED. Thune’s position is accurately represented. The Senate Majority Leader told Fox News’s Bret Baier on June 17 that passing the SAVE America Act is impossible without “nuking the legislative filibuster — and this is not something that we have anywhere close to the votes to do” (The Hill, 2026). The SAVE America Act, which would require proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote in federal elections, passed the House but has stalled in the Senate, where it cannot reach the 60-vote threshold needed under the filibuster. FISA Section 702 — authorizing warrantless surveillance of foreigners abroad — expired last weekend, creating pressure for a standalone extension. Vance’s framing that the American people “love” the SAVE Act is a reasonable reading of polling on voter ID generally, though the specific bill is more contested.
Iran-Backed Groups, Kurds, and Regional Stability
What Vance Said
A reporter from a Middle Eastern outlet asked how the MOU affects Iranian-backed proxy groups — particularly in Iraq, where militias have damaged U.S. facilities and allies — and specifically mentioned that Iran had attacked Kurdish areas in the Kurdistan Region just two days before.
Vance’s answer was brief but clear: “What this agreement does fundamentally is it requires Iran to behave like a normal country.” If Iran doesn’t, it gets no economic benefits. He said this would be “a great thing for the Kurds” and anyone threatened by Iranian-funded organizations, if Iran complies.
Cuba: Next?
What Vance Said
A reporter asked whether Cuba is the administration’s “next” target, citing Trump’s comments about finishing Iran and then turning to Cuba. Vance deflected the specific question to Secretary of State Marco Rubio (“you guys have to ask Marco about Cuba”), then offered some general commentary: Cuba’s economy is “probably in worse shape than the Iranian economy,” and the U.S. is currently talking to the Cuban government about possible changes. The same basic framework — change your behavior and relations improve — applies.
Switzerland and Upcoming Negotiations
What Vance Said
Vance confirmed he plans to lead the U.S. negotiating team and intends to travel to Switzerland for the opening of technical nuclear talks, expected sometime this weekend (June 20-21). He said he is not certain of the exact date because “it’s not an easy country, Iran, to get out of” — Iranian representatives also need to travel. The technical talks will focus on the nitty-gritty of how Iran actually destroys its highly enriched uranium stockpile, among other nuclear specifics.
Troop Drawdown
What Vance Said
The MOU contemplates a U.S. troop drawdown from the Gulf region, but only as part of the final deal — not immediately. If Iran fully complies, the U.S. would return to its pre-conflict force posture, meaning the additional aircraft carrier groups and other combat assets deployed during the war would be withdrawn. Vance noted that neither side actually wants a permanent heavy U.S. military presence in the region.
Pope Leo XIV’s Reaction — and Vance’s Response
What Vance Said
A reporter relayed that Pope Leo XIV had welcomed the MOU and expressed hope it would strengthen mutual trust and help end the war.
Vance’s response: “Praise Jesus. I’m glad that the Pope has positive things to say about our MOU. I think that the Pope is fundamentally accurate.”
Republican Critics: Vance’s Message
What Vance Said
When asked directly about Senate Republicans who have criticized the deal in the past 24 hours — including a number of Vance’s former colleagues from his time in the Senate — he offered a two-part message.
First: “Have a little bit of faith in the President of the United States.” He argued Trump has earned credibility on Iran by getting the situation “this far.”
Second: most of what critics believe about the deal is “just fundamentally untrue,” based on misreadings or mischaracterizations of the MOU. He cited Senator Lindsey Graham as an example of someone who expressed concerns and then came around after getting a full briefing from special envoy Steve Witkoff. Graham posted on X that he now considers the MOU “beneficial to the United States.”
Context
Graham’s arc illustrates the Republican dynamic: initial alarm and public skepticism, then a more cautious endorsement after a personal briefing. Other Republican critics remain concerned about details that have not yet been finalized — particularly on enrichment and inspections — and the administration has acknowledged those negotiations are still to come.
Analysts’ Note: What to Watch
A few threads worth following as the 60-day clock ticks:
The enrichment question is the deal’s most contested element. The U.S. says no enrichment. Iran’s public statements suggest it expects to retain some enrichment rights. These two positions cannot both be true, and the 60-day technical talks will likely surface this clash early.
Iran’s missile capability is substantially larger than the administration’s public statements have suggested, per multiple U.S. intelligence assessments. Whether this affects the deal’s final security architecture is unclear.
Fordow — Iran’s deeply buried backup enrichment facility — appears partially intact. Its status will likely be a flashpoint in technical negotiations.
Israel’s posture in Lebanon remains a wild card. The administration has clearly grown frustrated with Israeli strikes on civilian areas in Beirut, but has limited leverage to stop them without threatening the broader military relationship.
Congressional oversight is minimal so far — the administration claims OLC backing for acting without Congress on sanctions, and no formal briefing has yet occurred. This will face legal challenge.
MLA Citation
“Vice President J.D. Vance Holds a White House Press Briefing.” Political Transcript Wire, 18 June 2026, ProQuest, https://www.proquest.com/wire-feeds/vice-president-j-d-vance-holds-white-house-press/docview/3353766958/se-2?accountid=46614. Accessed 18 June 2026.
Sources
-
AAA. (2026, June 18). National average drops below $4/gallon as summer travel heats up. https://gasprices.aaa.com/national-average-drops-below-4-gallon-as-summer-travel-heats-up/
-
Al Jazeera. (2026, June 17). Iran confirms that MOU has been signed electronically by both sides. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/6/17/iran-confirms-that-mou-has-been-signed-electronically-by-both-sides
-
CBS News. (2026, June 18). Gas prices fall below $4 a gallon for the first time in nearly 3 months. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gas-prices-below-4-gallon-iran-strait-of-hormuz/
-
CBS News. (2026, June 18). Trump lashes out at “fools” who oppose Iran deal amid bipartisan criticism. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-deal-reaction-trump-republicans-democrats/
-
CNBC. (2026, April 21). A timeline of how the Iran war shook oil prices — and what comes next. https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/21/oil-price-iran-war-middle-east.html
-
Congressional Research Service. (2026, April 9). Iran and nuclear weapons production. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12106
-
Council on Foreign Relations. (2026, June 17). What are Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities? https://www.cfr.org/articles/what-are-irans-nuclear-and-missile-capabilities
-
Discovery Alert. (2026). Pre-Iran war oil prices: 2026 crude market collapse. https://discoveryalert.com.au/pre-iran-war-oil-prices-2026-crude-market-collapse/
-
FactCheck.org. (2019, March). Obama didn’t give Iran ‘150 billion in cash.’ https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/obama-didnt-give-iran-150-billion-in-cash/
-
Graham, L. [@LindseyGrahamSC]. (2026, June 17). After this discussion, it is my opinion that signing the MOU will be beneficial to the United States. [Post]. X. https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/2067293241083347122
-
The Hill. (2026, June 17). Thune says Senate will move FISA bill without SAVE America Act, rebuffing Trump. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5925177-thune-fisa-save-act/
-
The Hill. (2026, June 18). Lindsey Graham backs US-Iran MOU, sees regional benefits. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5928901-lindsey-graham-us-iran-mou/
-
New Arab. (2026, May 13). US intelligence says Iran retains 70% of missile arsenal. https://www.newarab.com/news/us-intelligence-says-iran-retains-70-missile-arsenal
-
New Republic. (2026, June 16). Trump hasn’t told GOP anything about Iran deal — and they’re pissed. https://newrepublic.com/post/211918/donald-trump-iran-deal-briefing-republicans
-
NewsNation. (2026, June 18). Average US gas prices drop below $4. https://www.newsnationnow.com/business/your-money/average-us-gas-prices-drop/
-
Newsweek. (2023). Fact Check: Did the US under Obama give Iran $150 billion? https://www.newsweek.com/us-give-iran-150-billion-barack-obama-jack-posobiec-1835083
-
NPR. (2026, June 15). U.S. and Iran announce an initial deal to end the war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. https://www.npr.org/2026/06/15/nx-s1-5858590/us-iran-deal-updates
-
The Defense News. (2026, May 13). US intelligence assesses Iran retains 70 percent of missile arsenal. https://www.thedefensenews.com/news-details/US-Intelligence-Assesses-Iran-Retains-70-Percent-of-Missile-Arsenal-and-Restores-Access-to-Most-Facilities-After-Attacks/
-
Time. (2026, June 17). Read the full text of the 14-point agreement between the U.S. and Iran. https://time.com/article/2026/06/17/us-iran-peace-deal-agreement-leaked-draft-text/