There is legislation that I think would be very constructive to that end. It was introduced in the House by Congressman Mulvaney, and what it would do is streamline some of the regulations affecting business development companies.

you're going to see how this campaign plays out before he can determine whether to support Donald Trump.

the notion that repealing Title II puts taxpayers on the hook for a bailout is just amazing to me.

we did not have an adequate resolution mechanism for the failure of a very large, complex financial institution.

Do you think a $50 billion bank in America is systemically important to our $17 trillion economy?

taxpayers are on the hook today because of Dodd-Frank.

I thought this was a terrible deal at the time. I thought then it was a bad idea to turn over $100 billion to the world's leading State sponsor of terrorism.

Despite all of this bad behavior post-JCPOA conclusion, it seems to me the Administration is, nevertheless, conferring more benefits upon the Iranians than the JCPOA even requires.

Has Secretary Kerry been visiting European banks and encouraging them to do business with Iran?

It has been characterized by some European banks as him actively encouraging them to do business with Iran despite the outrageous behavior.

I get that, but just so that I understand, is it the policy of the Administration to pay Iran for the heavy water?

In fact, doesn't the Administration argue that this is not a legally binding agreement with respect to Iran but, rather, a set of political commitments?