Benjamin Netanyahu’s revelations about the Iran Deal are making the Obama administration look particularly bad. That means Barack Obama’s fan club has really got their work cut out for them. Fortunately, for the most part, they’re more than willing to go the extra mile to spin this for the sake of their god-king.

Here’s Vox’s effort:

It’s something else. Here’s a sample:

This all sounds significant. The problem, experts say, is that most of what Netanyahu said was already well-known. The nuclear weapons research program he was discussing ended about 15 years ago. The prime minister presented no information that Iran was currently producing nuclear weapons, or was otherwise in violation of the deal’s restrictions on nuclear activities.

So why all the sturm and drang? Partly, it was to intimidate Iran: to show that Israeli intelligence could infiltrate Iran’s most sensitive facilities. But mostly, it was a speech targeted at President Trump before the May 12 deadline. There were lots of photos and visual aids, simple messages typed out in big block letters — the kinds of things Trump reportedly likes to see when receiving information.

But more fundamentally, there’s a hole in Netanyahu’s logic. His argument appeared to be that Iran lied about nuclear activities in the past, which means it’s likely to lie about it in the future. Put more bluntly, Netanyahu says that the Iran deal is a bad deal because it relies on trusting the Iranians, who aren’t trustworthy.

The problem, experts say, is that the Iran deal isn’t actually based on trust. It’s based on a deeply rigorous system of inspections, one that has repeatedly confirmed that Iran is not, in fact, cheating by, say, restarting prohibited centrifuges. It’s one thing to have a covert bomb program in 2003, before the agreement; it’s quite another when your country is crawling with IAEA inspectors. The deal doesn’t rely on trusting the Iranians; it creates series of mechanisms that hamstring their ability to lie.

John Harwood, is that you?

The only that could possibly make that even more better (read: stupider)? Check out who wrote it:

That’s right. The Gaza Bridge guy. And naturally he’s skeptical of anything that makes Obama look bad. He should focus more on not making himself look bad right now. Because he looks like an idiot.

In addition to undermining his own credibility (again), Beauchamp also manages to undermine Obama’s. If Beauchamp is arguing that Netanyahu’s revelations are a nothingburger because none of it was new information, then what does it say about Obama that this information was already out there and he went through with the Iran Deal anyway? And not only go through with it, but defend it repeatedly?

Set the ol’ “Number of Days Without an Accident” counter back to zero, Vox.

***

Related:

SERIOUSLY!? Former Obama adviser’s spin on Israel’s Iran deal revelations is ‘beyond parody’