Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

California Dem: ‘I Don’t Think There Were Many People’ Who Agreed with Pelosi on Bibi

A California Democrat said he didn’t see much agreement among his colleagues with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) assertion that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insulted the intelligence of Congress.

“I was near tears throughout the prime minister’s speech – saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation,” Pelosi said in a statement after the address.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), a pro-Israel lawmaker who has been working on the Iran nuclear threat for many years, stressed that “every speech includes an awful lot of stuff that members of the audience already know, and then you build from that.”

“Look at any State of the Union address, and you will see an awful lot of things you already knew, and then that’s the foundation for whatever proposals or additional information the speaker wants to provide,” Sherman told CNN.

“I think that Netanyahu did a very good job of reminding us and giving us additional reasons why we cannot accept a nuclear Iran. There was not a lot in the speech about how to put more pressure on Iran, so that Iran agrees to a reasonable deal. And that is the program we’re still trying to discover.”

Sherman said Netanyahu’s speech could be “one of 1,000 different things” to ultimately prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

“We’re in a tough position. None of the options available look all that inviting. There are ways to put more pressure on Iran. We ought to be doing that. And, at the same time, I will be interested in looking at the deal that comes out of the Swiss negotiations,” he said. “I’m hoping that we see intrusive inspections, because I’m just as concerned about sneak-out as I am breakout of this agreement.”

Asked directly about Pelosi’s reaction, Sherman replied, “I don’t think there were many people on the floor who thought that.”

“You saw the reaction there. If the speech was condescending, it was condescending to everybody in the room. And yet the vast majority of the people in the room didn’t find it condescending,” he said.

“That doesn’t mean that it didn’t repeat a lot of things that a lot of us knew. But that’s not condescension. That’s oratory. Every speech, pick at random any State of the Union speech for the last 10 years, and look at how many sentences in that speech remind you of what you already know, tell you things that everybody agrees with, remind you of how dedicated we are to our veterans, for example. You have got to have a lot of stuff in a speech that everybody already knows and agrees with before you present your additional ideas and your additional insights.”

Posted at 3:20 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

You Mean the Founders Were Serious About That Second Amendment Stuff?

That’s what the liberal ninnies at the Washington Post must be wondering right about now. Despite their best efforts to stampede the American public into surrendering yet another of its consitutional rights (and one very dangerous to the Leftist project), more and more states are moving toward — gasp! — Constitutional Carry. Which means, basically, “shall not be infringed.”

This may be the year that several states will allow people to walk around in public with concealed guns — no permit required.

Let me stop right there: Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Gun rights advocates have had tremendous success in recent decades making it easier to obtain a concealed-carry permit. In most states, the process is now a fairly straightforward: Applicants typically have to pass a background check. Some states also ask that applicants take a gun safety class, and some may reject applications if there is evidence of mental illness.

A handful of states are far more permissive. Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Wyoming and Vermont don’t require a permit at all for concealed carry in public. Vermont has never had such a requirement; Alaska went permit-free in 2003; Arizona in 2010; Wyoming in 2011 (limited to residents); and Arkansas in 2013.

Yeah, and you know how dangerous Vermont is, what with every stump-toothed Green Mountain good ol’ boy packing and whatnot. Gee, isn’t about time we hear from some anti-Constitutional scholar at the Brady Center about how awful the latest turn of events is? Coming right up!

These victories have been hard-wrung. “Even if a majority of the legislature or the governor might be in favor of concealed-carry laws, it’s generally agreed that having some sort of training or background check is really important,” said Brian Malte, the national policy director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

But in 2014, Republicans took control of nearly a dozen state chambers, allowing permitless concealed-carry efforts to resurge in places like New Hampshire, West Virginia and Maine.The American public has recently been tilting toward gun rights; a Pew poll last month showed guns rights supporters pulling ahead of gun control supporters 52 to 46.

But Americans also want background checks, which permitless concealed-carry laws could do away with. A Quinnipac poll last year also showed that an overwhelming majority of voters, both Democrat and Republican, support background checks for all gun purchases. A similar majority would also bar people suffering from mental illness from purchasing guns.

Somebody needs to tell the Post and its crack reporters than constitutional rights are not subject to opinion polls or plebiscites. Further, the place to learn gun safety is in the home or the community, not from the state or federal government.

Gun control advocates say that about 18 states are looking at permitless carry laws this year, depending on how you count. Here is a roundup of the more prominent bills…

Feel free to click on the link at the top to see which terrifying Galt’s Gulch-type crazy lands are considering following the plain text of the Second Amendment. Then consider moving there. Freedom is always worth fighting for.

 

 

Posted at 2:35 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

Idiot Nobel Chairman Who Gave Obama a Peace Prize Receives Unprecedented Demotion

First time for everything.

The committee that awards the Nobel Peace Prize has demoted its chairman for the first time in the 114-year history of the award, after years of pressure from Beijing for his removal….

Mr Jagland also oversaw the controversial award handed to newly elected US President Barack Obama in 2009, shortly after becoming chairman that same year.

The move stunned the world and the recipient alike, as Mr Obama had been in office for fewer than nine months and the United States was still waging simultaneous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Mr Jagland said at the time that the organisation wanted to praise the US leader’s early vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and capture “the spirit of the times, the needs of the era”.

The article tries to blame it on politics but this is the first time in the award’s 114 year history that a chairman has been demoted. There certainly have been political shifts in Norway and on the committee in 144 years and no one else got canned. Maybe the Nobel laureate who had a vision of a world free of nuclear weapons can explain why he is so intent on making sure Iran gets some.

Posted at 2:32 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

Feminists Fail to Notice Netanyahu’s Stand for Muslim Women

YouTube Preview Image

Fast-forward to 19:12 (or better yet, just watch the whole thing).

In the world of contemporary feminist politics, criticism of Islam is off the table. Unless, of course, you’re a female Muslim in a Muslim-dominated country who desperately seeks reform. If you are, you’re stuck banging your head against the wall as your sisters in the West do everything to ignore you in pursuit of wage equality, sexual consent apps, and chronicling Lena Dunham’s latest hair adventure.

Most women who follow feminist media is sadly too drunk on the Kool Aid to realize that popular sites like Jezebel, Feministing, the Mary Sue, Everyday Feminism, and the Feminist Majority Foundation have all failed to comment on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s historic address to Congress. Their flagrant ignorance of the most important foreign policy issue of our time is inexcusable. The willful blind eye they continue to turn towards women oppressed by radical Islamic rule is unforgivable. In one simple, powerful sentence Netanyahu did what contemporary feminists in the West refuse to do:

In this deadly game of thrones, there’s no place for America or for Israel, no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don’t share the Islamist medieval creed, no rights for women, no freedom for anyone.

His Game of Thrones mention received more attention than did the fact that Netanyahu equated “freedom for anyone” with “no rights for women.” There’s your meme. There’s your platform. There’s your unifying fact: If women are not free, no one is free. And yet here Western feminists remain embroiled in a heated debate over Patricia Arquette’s lack of “intersectionality“. There’s an age-old meme for that one, too: It’s the pot calling the kettle black.

In appearing before Congress today, Bibi Netanyahu did more for women oppressed by Islam than the feminist movement has on a worldwide scale. He joins a small but powerful group of real feminists including Nonie Darwish, Wafa Sultan, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali who are brave enough to use their western platforms to speak out on an issue vital to women across the globe. Israel’s Prime Minister ended his speech by quoting Moses: “Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them…“. It’s time contemporary feminists ask themselves what they are so afraid of.

Posted at 2:30 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

VIDEO: The Great Pat Condell Confronts Progressive Universities

We all know that universities tend to be extremely progressive. That’s the case in both the United States and Europe. Whenever a student dares to express conservative views, he’s quickly pushed aside, marginalized and sometimes even punished for his audacity to speak his mind. After all, freedom of speech doesn’t mean that everybody has that right. Of course not!

You may laugh, but British university students now actually demand the “right to be comfortable.” I kid you not.

It doesn’t get much insaner than that.

The great British YouTube’er Pat Condell shares that view and just published a fantastic video in which he utterly destroys progressive universities and students. Teaser:

Inevitably, of course, this right to be comfortable is very selective, and only extends to those who hold the correct opinion. Anyone else can expect to be made very uncomfortable indeed by being silenced – either banned outright, or shouted down by militant “progressive” puritan bigots who think in slogans, and who think it’s more virtuous to be “progressive” than to be factually accurate or morally just, or to have anything remotely resembling an open mind.

Ouch. And guess what? There’s much more where that came from. Watch it:

Posted at 2:11 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

White House Editing the President’s Transcripts Again

YouTube Preview Image

As you’ll hear in the above slip-up, President Obama said today: “The prime minister I think appropriately pointed out that the bond between the United States and America is unbreakable, and on that point, I thoroughly agree.” The third-party CQ transcript agreed on the wording.

Screen Shot 2015-03-03 at 2.33.19 PM

An omission of Israel while citing “the United States and America” could be a case of the Mondays, a tired president, a slip of the tongue.

But when the White House released the official transcript from the Oval Office comments, they changed “and” to “of.” Which still didn’t make sense, but someone may have come to the conclusion it sounded less silly:

Screen Shot 2015-03-03 at 4.26.16 PM

The White House has a history of changing transcripts to fuzz out certain things said by President Obama, such as when last year when he visited his old home in Chicago.

“Because Michelle and I and the kids, we left so quickly that there’s still junk on my desk, including some unpaid bills. I think eventually they got paid — but they’re sort of stacked up. And messages, newspapers and all kinds of stuff,” he said in comments documented by members of the press corps traveling with the president.

However, the White House transcript later released said: “We left so quickly that there’s still junk on my desk, including some — (inaudible) — newspapers and all kinds of stuff.”

Posted at 1:32 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

Feinstein Agrees with Netanyahu That 10-Year Nuke Deal ‘Not a Long Time’

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) objected to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coming to Congress to speak today, but she revealed after the address that she disagrees with the timeframe of the Obama administration’s plan.

Feinstein said Sunday that it was “arrogant” for Netanyahu to suggest he was speaking on behalf of worldwide Jewry, but was in one of the front seats for his address today. She even stood and applauded when some of her colleagues remained seated.

“I think it was a very powerful speech. I think it reinforced the very close Israeli-American relationship. And I think he clearly admitted that the United States has really done more for Israel than virtually any other country in terms of money over the tenure of Barack Obama, money for security, for Iron Dome, for financing of equipment, et cetera. It’s clear he doesn’t like what he thinks the deal is,” Feinstein told CNN.

“Now, I don’t know whether he knows or he doesn’t know. But what he didn’t say was what would happen if there was no deal or what would happen if the four European nations and China and Russia all agreed and the United States did not. And he didn’t make a suggestion as to what Israel would find agreeable. He simply said, there’s nothing that we agree with here. And then he made a number of pronouncements of terrible things that could happen.”

Feinstein did, however, agree with Netanyahu’s demands that a deal insist Iran stop aggression against his neighbors, stop supporting terrorism and “stop threatening to annihilate my country.”

“The question is, that if there is a deal and if Iran is willing to give up its nuclear pursuits, at least with exception of the peaceful on — peaceful pursuit and then have all of the fissile material moved out, that that would — might indicate a change. But there is no question as to what Iran has done. The game — the terrible games that have been played and it’s got to stop,” she said.

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee said she couldn’t comment on the breakout time for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, but she did comment on the administration’s intention to shoot for a 10-year deal with the Islamic Republic.

“One of the things that I’ve seen in my lifetime is time goes by very fast. And 10 years is not a long time. Fifteen or 20 years is a much better period of time in terms of changing behavior,” Feinstein said.

“My preference would be that it be a longer deal and that we’d be able to guarantee a longer period of breakout. But that’s just me. What he didn’t say is what would happen if there is no deal. What would Israel do? What would Israel expect the United States to do? What in many — much of his rhetoric suggested is that there’s a very real possible likelihood of Israel taking aggressive action.”

Netanyahu said “because Iran’s nuclear program would be left largely intact” under the deal, “Iran’s break-out time would be very short — about a year by U.S. assessment, even shorter by Israel’s.”

“A decade may seem like a long time in political life, but it’s the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It’s a blink of an eye in the life of our children,” he said. “We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran’s nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could product many, many nuclear bombs.”

Posted at 1:13 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

Obama Reads Transcript of Netanyahu Speech, Declares ‘Nothing Comes Close’ to P5+1 Deal

President Obama didn’t watch Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech, and after reading a transcript of the address insisted there was “nothing new” there.

But an evidently irked commander in chief took more than 10 minutes to relay that thought in the Oval Office today.

The press pool was allowed in for a photo op with new Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who just returned from a trip to Afghanistan.

Netanyahu’s speech began at 11 a.m., and this morning the White House added an 11:30 a.m. videoconference call with British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Francois Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, and European Council President Donald Tusk “to discuss Ukraine and global security issues.”

Obama told reporters that there was a lots of context in Netanyahu’s speech on which they agree, including “that Iran has been a dangerous regime and continues to engage in activities that are contrary to the interest of the United States, to Israel, and to the region.”

On the “core issue” of preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, the president said, “the prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.”

“Now, the deal that we are trying to negotiate that is not yet completed would cut off the different pathways for Iran to advance its nuclear capabilities. It would roll back some elements of its program. It would ensure that it did not have what we call a breakout capacity that was shorter than a year’s time. And it would subject Iran to the most vigorous inspections and verifications regimes that have ever been put in place,” Obama said.

“The alternative that the prime minister offers is no deal, in which case Iran will immediately begin once again pursuing its nuclear program, accelerate its nuclear program, without us having any insight into what they’re doing. And without constraint.”

Actually, Netanyahu called for a better deal: “My friends, for over a year, we’ve been told that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well, this is a bad deal. It’s a very bad deal. We’re better off without it,” the prime minister said. “Now we’re being told that the only alternative to this bad deal is war. That’s just not true. The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal. A better deal that doesn’t leave Iran with a vast nuclear infrastructure and such a short break-out time. A better deal that keeps the restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program in place until Iran’s aggression ends. A better deal that won’t give Iran an easy path to the bomb. A better deal that Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally.”

Obama acknowledged “it may be that Iran cannot say yes to a good deal,” as negotiations continue with the Islamic State.

“If we’re successful in negotiating, then, in fact, this will be the best deal possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Nothing else comes close. Sanctions won’t do it. Even military action would not be as successful as the deal that we have put forward,” he maintained.

“And I think it is very important not to be distracted by the nature of the Iranian regimes’ ambitions when it comes to territory or terrorism.”

Even though the president objects to bipartisan legislation that would allow Congress to review and sign off on any nuclear agreement, Obama said “let’s wait until there’s absolutely a deal on the table that Iran has agreed to, at which point everyone can evaluate it.”

“We don’t have to speculate. And what I can guarantee is that if it’s a deal I’ve signed off on, I will be able to prove that it is the best way for us to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,” he said. “And for us to pass up on that potential opportunity would be a grave mistake. It’s not one that I intend to make, and I will take that case to every member of Congress once we actually have a deal.”

Obama stressed the administration line that “it is very important for us not to politicize the relationship between Israel and the United States.”

“It’s very important for all of us Americans to realize that we have a system of government in which foreign policy runs through the executive branch and the president, not through other channels,” he added.

“…So what I’m focused on right now is solving this problem. I’m not focused on the politics of it. I’m not focused on the theater of it. And my strong suggestion would be that members of Congress as they evaluate it stay similarly focused.”

Posted at 12:22 pm on March 3rd, 2015 by

WATCH: CNN Analyst Calls Netanyahu’s Holocaust Mentions ‘Political’

YouTube Preview Image
Posted at 11:45 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Yay Team! Boehner Getting Ready To Cave On Immigration Provisions For DHS Funding Bill

Democrat Lite Majority.

House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner cleared the way for a vote as soon as Tuesday on a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of the fiscal year, dealing a blow to conservative Republicans who wanted to include language blocking President Barack Obama’s immigration actions.

If successful, the vote would end a legislative standoff that began late last year over security funding and Obama’s immigration actions, which have been put on hold by the courts.

Spending authority for the department that spearheads domestic counter terrorism operations ends at midnight on Friday.

Boehner was left with few if any viable procedural options to continue the fight over Obama’s executive actions that last year bypassed Congress to lift the threat of deportation for millions of undocumented residents.

Obama and Democrats have backed a so-called clean funding bill passed by the Senate, and Senate Democrats have repeatedly blocked a House-passed bill that includes the immigration provisions.

I’m sure that we were all imagining last November that the incoming Republican majority would do all it could to encourage Executive overreach by President Obama, right?

The Republicans are drawing lines in the sand that are immediately blown away by hot air from the MSM. This new majority is so afraid to be portrayed badly by the press they’re legislating like scared children who experience perpetual angst about disappointing mommy and daddy.

Barely two months in, and Obama has already seen that the GOP can’t mount any real opposition to his most outlandish attempts at fundamental transformation.

January, 2017 seems to be getting farther away, not closer.

Posted at 11:29 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Nancy Pelosi Turns Her Back on Benjamin Netanyahu’s Speech


 

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi turned her back on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he said, “Even if Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand.”

While nearly everyone else in the audience stood and cheered for the Israeli prime minister’s defiant declaration, the camera caught an unhappy-looking Pelosi turning her back and speaking to the colleagues behind her.

Netanyahu continued, “But I know that Israel does not stand alone. I know that America stands with Israel. I know that you stand with Israel.” The audience in the House chamber responded with another standing ovation and thunderous applause.

In a press statement after Netanyahu’s address, Pelosi said, “I was near tears throughout the prime minister’s speech – saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation.

While Democrats are rushing to the microphones today to decry the “political theater” of Netanyahu’s speech to Congress, it seems that Ms. Pelosi wasn’t above playing the drama queen to protest the speech she has called “inappropriate.”

 

 

 

Posted at 10:53 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Pelosi ‘Near Tears’ During Bibi Speech Because of ‘Insult’

Relaxed in a front-row seat, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was like any other member of Congress listening to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech.

Reid, who is recovering from eye surgery, got a shout out at the beginning of the address.

“Harry, it’s good to see you back on your feet,” Netanyahu said. “I guess it’s true what they say, you can’t keep a good man down.”

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), however, seemed agitated during the speech and slipped out of the chamber quickly before Netanyahu even left.

In a statement afterward, Pelosi said she was “near tears” during the address — but not because of the prime minister’s impassioned defense of the Jewish people or the presence of Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel in the chamber.

“The unbreakable bonds between the United States and Israel are rooted in our shared values, our common ideals and mutual interests. Ours is a deep and abiding friendship that will always reach beyond party. Americans stand shoulder to shoulder with the Israeli people. The state of Israel stands as the greatest political achievement of the 20th century, and the United States will always have an unshakable commitment to Israel’s security,” Pelosi said.

“That is why, as one who values the U.S. – Israel relationship, and loves Israel, I was near tears throughout the prime minister’s speech – saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5 +1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation,” she said.

The House minority leader said Netanyahu “reiterated something we all agree upon: a nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable to both our countries.”

“We have all said that a bad deal is worse than no deal, and stopping the spread of nuclear weapons is the bedrock of our foreign policy and national security,” Pelosi added. “As President Obama has said consistently, all options are on the table for preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.”

Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), though, was a much more enthusiastic audience member.

Hoyer appeared side-by-side with Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) at the AIPAC conference on Sunday night, praising the bipartisan nature of congressional support for Israel.

UPDATE: Pelosi made the lead on state-owned Iran Press TV.

pelosipresstv

Posted at 10:07 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Flashback: Bibi in 2011 Joint Congressional Session Speech

The same moral clarity. The same penetrating insight. The same plea to stop “militant Islam.”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s appearance on May 24, 2011, before a joint session of Congress was, if anything, even more enthusiastically received than his speech today.

When the White House scoffed that Netanyahu had “nothing new” to say, they were absolutely right. But that’s because this administration has failed utterly to heed his warnings about Iran and has doubled down by opening negotiations that would acknowledge Iran’s ability to enrich uranium and, by extension, construct a nuclear bomb to threaten Israel.

Here’s Bibi in 2011:

When I last stood here, I spoke of the consequences of Iran developing nuclear weapons. Now time is running out. The hinge of history may soon turn, for the greatest danger of all could soon be upon us: a militant Islamic regime armed with nuclear weapons.

Militant Islam threatens the world. It threatens Islam.

Now, I have no doubt — I’m absolutely convinced — that it will ultimately be defeated. I believe it will eventually succumb to the forces of freedom and progress. It depends on cloistering young minds for a given amount of years, and the process of opening up information will ultimately defeat this movement. But like other fanatacisms that were doomed to fail, militant Islam could exact an horrific price from all of us before its eventual demise.

A nuclear-armed Iran would ignite a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. It would give terrorists a nuclear umbrella. It would make the nightmare of nuclear terrorism a clear and present danger throughout the world.

See, I want you to understand what this means, because if we don’t stop it, it’s coming. They could put a bomb anywhere. They could put it in a missile; they’re working on missiles that could reach this city. They could put it on a — on a ship inside a container; could reach every port. They could eventually put it in a suitcase or in a subway.

Now, the threat to my country cannot be overstated. Those who dismiss it are sticking their heads on the stand. Less than seven decades after 6 million Jews were murdered, Iran’s leaders deny the Holocaust of the Jewish people while calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state. Leaders who spew such venom should be banned from every respectable forum on the planet. (Applause.)

But there’s something that makes the outrage even greater. Do you know what that is? It’s the lack of outrage, because in much of the international community, the call(s) for our destruction are met with utter silence. It’s even worse because there are many who rush to condemn Israel for defending itself against Iran’s terror proxies. Not you. Not America. (Applause.)

You’ve acted differently. You’ve condemned the Iranian regime for its genocidal aims. You’ve passed tough sanctions against Iran.

History will salute you, America. (Applause.)

We yearn for national leaders with that kind of clarity of thinking. At great risk to his personal political prospects — Israel will hold their elections in 2 weeks — the prime minister came to Washington to plead with his friends to stop this deal before it becomes reality.

Here’s Netanyahu’s entire 2011 address to a joint session of Congress. The quoted part above begins at 13:00 minutes.

Posted at 10:05 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Even Robert Gibbs Finds Hillary’s Private Email Use ‘Highly Unusual’

They’re BAAAAACK!

Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs says he can’t think of a good reason why Hillary Clinton would have used a personal email address for all correspondence when she was secretary of state.

“I think it is, obviously, highly unusual,” he said on NBC’s “Today” on Tuesday morning, following a report by The New York Times that Clinton used a non-government email to conduct official business, possibly in violation of federal record requirements. The State Department acknowledged to POLITICO on Monday that thousands of her emails were not preserved as a result.

Clinton and her people need to explain the situation in detail, Gibbs said.

Her Madameship’s explanation will probably be what it usually is: “Why are you picking on me?” This is the weakest, whiniest “strong” feminist icon you’ll ever encounter. More than likely, some staffer will be blamed for not properly informing the Smartest Woman In The World about the rules.

Predictably, MSNBC got right to “B…b…but SCOTT WALKER!”

Meanwhile, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker reportedly used a “secret” email system to conduct political business while county executive of Milwaukee.

Those dastardly county executives! Hillary is totally off the hook now!

Posted at 9:35 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Senators Want Obama to Support Putin Opponents in Honor of Nemtsov

Senators have introduced a resolution not just honoring slain Russian opposition leader Boris Nemtsov but pressing the Obama administration to back anti-Putin activists and add more Russian officials to Magnitsky Law sanctions.

Nemtsov was shot to death Friday night just steps from the Kremlin and Red Square as he crossed a Moscow bridge.

“Vladimir Putin instructed the heads of the Russian Investigative Committee, Interior Ministry and Federal Security Service to form an investigative group and keep the course of the investigation into the crime under personal control,” the Kremlin said in a statement Saturday.

“The President stated that this cruel murder has all the makings of a contract crime and is absolutely provocative in nature. Vladimir Putin expressed his deep condolences to the family and friends of the tragically deceased Boris Nemtsov.”

Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) rallied 15 co-sponsors for the resolution calling for a speedy and thorough investigation of Nemtsov’s murder and details a short history of Putin opponents who wound up dead.

It recognizes the “courageous work” of Nemtsov and encourages the release of “all surveillance tapes” around the crime scene from “different sources and angles.”

It asks Obama to add to the Magnitsky list, which sanctions Russian officials engaged in human rights violations, names that had previously been suggested by Nemtsov. It also asks the president to send a high-level delegation to Nemtsov’s funeral.

It further asks Obama to “significantly increase” U.S. government support for “like-minded partners in the Russian Federation and the region to combat the flow of propaganda and the climate of hatred created by President Putin.”

“Boris Nemtsov was the definition of courage. I was honored to know him and bear witness to his defense of his beloved Russia. He stood up for the most basic right of expressing public dissent. His killing is shocking and outrageous to the civilized world but, sadly, not unexpected in Putin’s Russia today,” said Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), who championed the Magnitsky law named after Russian attorney and whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, who died in custody.

“At the Helsinki Commission, we rely greatly on the personal testimony of people like Mr. Nemtsov who have direct experience and expertise on their own country’s compliance – and noncompliance — with international human rights commitments,” Cardin added. “These individuals should be able to speak the truth here, and in their home countries, without fear of violent retribution.”

Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), another co-sponsor, said Nemtsov’s murder is “another tragic reminder of how far off the path towards a free and open society Russia has fallen.”

“The world deserves a full account of the circumstances surrounding his death, and not just a sham hunt for the ‘real killer’ orchestrated out of the Kremlin,” Gardner said.

“A clear message must be sent to the Russian people from the people of the United States: We mourn the loss of this great humanitarian activist, we hear your calls for freedom and liberty, and we are forever your ally in the fight for a more just, open, and democratic society.”

Pressed on the Nemtsov murder, White House press secretary Josh Earnest said “we’ll see” if there’s a real investigation into the slaying of Putin’s foe.

“Well, given the stature that Mr. Nemtsov had attained, primarily because of his advocacy for the rights of the Russian people, that if ever there were a situation in which a prompt, impartial, and transparent investigation were warranted, this is certainly it,” Earnest said.

Posted at 9:32 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Meanwhile, the Fall of King David Is Complete

The only question is: did Gen. David Petraeus fall on his own or was he set up? Either way, a possibly potent rival to President Precious was taken off the playing field:

David H. Petraeus, the best-known military commander of his generation, has reached a plea deal with the Justice Department that will allow him to avoid an embarrassing trial over whether he provided classified information to a mistress when he was the director of the C.I.A.

Mr. Petraeus will plead guilty to one count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material, which carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison. Mr. Petraeus has signed the agreement, said Marc Raimondi, a Justice Department spokesman.

The plea deal completes a spectacular fall for Mr. Petraeus, a retired four-star general who was once discussed as a possible candidate for vice president or even president. He led the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and was the architect of a counterinsurgency strategy that at one time seemed a model for future warfare.

The mistress, Paula Broadwell, is a former Army Reserve officer who had an affair with Mr. Petraeus in 2011, when she was interviewing him for a biography, “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.” Mr. Petraeus resigned as the director of the C.I.A. in 2012, three days after President Obama was re-elected. At the time, Mr. Petraeus acknowledged the affair. He has since denied any criminal wrongdoing.

I have friends who worked with Petraeus in Iraq and they only ever spoke highly of him. A brilliant military commander and student of history has been outmaneuvered by a bunch of cheap, hustling crooks from Chicago. A real American tragedy.

 

 

 

Posted at 8:59 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Say Hello to the Ugliest Politicians in America

They would be Democrats, of course. Even worse — Democrats who are boycotting Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech today. Remember their names:

Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Al Franken (D-Minn.) announced Monday that they will not attend Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Tuesday address to a joint session of Congress.

One day after President Barack Obama said he would veto any new sanctions against Iran, House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) invited Netanyahu to make his case to Congress against a nuclear deal. Boehner extended the invitation without first consulting the White House, a move seen by some as disrespectful to Obama. The administration has pushed back on the speech, calling Boehner’s invite a breach of protocol.

“I strongly support Israel, and I remain deeply concerned about the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon, which I discussed in detail with Prime Minister Netanyahu when we met in Jerusalem last November,” Warren said in a statement, according to the Boston Globe. “It’s unfortunate that Speaker Boehner’s actions on the eve of a national election in Israel have made Tuesday’s event more political and less helpful for addressing the critical issue of nuclear nonproliferation and the safety of our most important ally in the Middle East.”

In a statement earlier Monday, Franken described the speech as a “partisan spectacle.”

Well, Franken of all people ought to know a partisan spectacle when he sees one, since this disgraceful appartchik particpates in one every day via the Democrat caucus.

In all, some 56 Democrats are planning to give Bibi the finger:

Congressional Democrats are angry that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) invited Netanyahu to speak to Congress without first telling the White House. Obama has said he will not meet with Netanyahu during the visit because it will occur two weeks before Israeli elections are set to take place.

Democrats face a difficult decision on whether to attend the address. Many will want to show support for the White House but will be wary of snubbing the leader of an important U.S. ally.

Find the complete list here. Remember their names, and take appropriate action at the ballot box at the earliest possible opportunity.

Naturally, our punk president has already tried to rain on Netanyahu’s parade. As Kennedy once said of Nixon: no class.

You can watch the speech live here.

 

 

Posted at 8:04 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Will Rep. Trey Gowdy and Benghazi Select Committee Subpoena Hillary’s Personal Emails?

The New York Times reported yesterday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have violated the law by exclusively using a personal email account to conduct State Department business and further that Clinton did not EVER have an official State Department email. It is required by the Federal Records Act that all government emails and records must be preserved. Clinton’s aides did not take any action to preserve Hilary’s private emails, the only record of her communications.

The New York Times also reported that Clinton’s people sent over 55,000 emails and documents to the State Department only TWO MONTHS AGO to comply with federal record keeping laws.

It was only two months ago, in response to a new State Department effort to comply with federal record-keeping practices, that Mrs. Clinton’s advisers reviewed tens of thousands of pages of her personal emails and decided which ones to turn over to the State Department. All told, 55,000 pages of emails were given to the department. Mrs. Clinton stepped down from the secretary’s post in early 2013.

Just to reiterate: we were promised an investigation into what happened during the terror attack at Benghazi, where four Americans were slaughtered including our ambassador to Libya; there were numerous congressional hearings dealing with the fiasco; the American people had to fight to get a select committee to bring some muscle to the investigation; and at no point did anyone scratch their head and ask “Why aren’t there any emails from Secretary of State Hilary Clinton amidst the documentation?”

Amazing.

A source on the Hill tells PJ Media that Rep. Trey Gowdy, as head of the Select Benghazi Committee, has the authority to subpoena the emails from the ISP of her pantsuit@gmail.com account. (Shout-out to WMAL’s Chris Plante for the email nomenclature.)

No one can possibly take the word of Hilary Clinton’s team that all appropriate emails were turned over to the State Department or turned over to any investigating authority since she has every reason to conceal what happened if she is culpable. Who else would possibly be trusted to make such a determination about evidence in an investigation? And if you are a lefty reading this and think this is not a big deal, just replace the name “Hilary Clinton” with the name “Dick Cheney” and let me know where you stand on the issue.

There is some precedent to subpoena Hilary’s email. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) subpoenaed Attorney General Eric Holder’s email when Issa was head of the Congressional Oversight Committee regarding an entirely different scandal, Fast and Furious. Holder refused to comply and was held in contempt of Congress. Issa subsequently filed charges to compel disclosure with the DC circuit court, which naturally has refused to take up the matter.

In this instance, the government isn’t even in possession of the emails (well, perhaps the NSA is…) in question, so Gowdy ought to go directly to her email provider and get the emails from there to make certain the proper information has been turned over. Will he do it?

 

 

Posted at 7:16 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Al-Arabiya Editor-in-Chief: Obama, Listen to Netanyahu on Iran

Al-Arabiya English’s editor-in-chief Faisal J. Abbas wrote an op-ed today titled “President Obama, listen to Netanyahu on Iran”:

The Israeli PM managed to hit the nail right on the head when he said that Middle Eastern countries are collapsing and that “terror organizations, mostly backed by Iran, are filling in the vacuum” during a recent ceremony held in Tel Aviv to thank outgoing IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz for his role during “challenging” times.

In just a few words, Mr. Netanyahu managed to accurately summarize a clear and present danger, not just to Israel (which obviously is his concern), but to other U.S. allies in the region.

What is absurd, however, is that despite this being perhaps the only thing that brings together Arabs and Israelis (as it threatens them all), the only stakeholder that seems not to realize the danger of the situation is President Obama, who is now infamous for being the latest pen-pal of the Supreme Leader of the World’s biggest terrorist regime: Ayottallah Ali Khamenei. (Although, the latter never seems to write back!)

Just to be clear, nobody disagrees that ridding Iran of its nuclear ambitions is paramount. And if this can be achieved peacefully, then it would be even better. However, any reasonable man CAN’T possibly turn a blind eye to the other realities on the ground.

Indeed, it is Mr. Obama’s controversial take on managing global conflicts that raises serious questions. A case in point is his handling of the Syrian crisis, where according to his own philosophical views, Obama probably takes pride that he managed to rid the Assad regime of its chemical weapons arsenal without firing a single bullet.

Of course, in theory, this could be quite an achievement (which only another war philosopher, such as Sun Tzu, would applaud); but in reality, the problem with what happened is that the REAL issue hasn’t been resolved; as such, the Syrian regime continues – until this day – to slaughter their own people (albeit, using conventional weapons, you know… your everyday bullets, missiles and barrel bombs!)

As such, the real Iranian threat is not JUST the regime’s nuclear ambitions, but its expansionist approach and state-sponsored terrorism activities which are still ongoing. …

Posted at 6:21 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

‘Lesbian,’ ‘Fatso,’ ‘Jewish’ Banned from Nutella Ad Campaign

Nutella has a marketing campaign in France that allows users to personalize jars of the delicious chocolate-hazelnut goodness and share the image on social media.

PJTatler Nutella

Well, for the most part.

The marketers behind Nutella’s “Say It With Nutella” campaign– or “Dites-le Avec Nutella” in French– are facing a backlash after it was discovered that several words have been prohibited from use.

“Here you can create your custom messages and share them with those you love!” the website says.

Russia Today reports on the entire list of banned words:

The list of banned words includes many health –related words such as “cancer,” “obesity,” “fatso,” “diabetes,” and “oil.” Also variations of “poop,” “cannabis” and other references to body functions and drugs are prohibited. “Gay” is allowed while “lesbian” and “homo” have both been deemed offensive. “Christian” is permitted but “Jewish” and “Muslim” are not.

Nutella released the following statement concerning the controversy:

“By giving customers the opportunity to personalize their Nutella jar we want to create a way for them to share enthusiasm for the brand. Negative or insulting terms were directly removed from the options field. Similarly, terms of communities that are often subject to attacks by malicious people were removed from the possibilities.”

 

Posted at 5:33 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

ISIS Threatened Twitter over Blocked Terror Accounts

On Monday, Twitter officials revealed that ISIS has threatened Twitter employees including co-founder Jack Dorsey because the company has been blocking terror-related accounts. Law enforcement is working with Twitter about the threats.

“Our security team is investigating the veracity of these threats with relevant law enforcement officials,” according to a Twitter statement.

The NYPD is also on the case, saying they will keep a closer eye on the New York Twitter offices.

“We are aware of the current threat,” said John Miller, the NYPD’s deputy commissioner of intelligence and counter-terrorism. “We have been in touch with Twitter, their security people. Our critical response vehicles have that as a regular location. They know us we know them and we are working on it.”

ISIS wrote on the website JustPasteIt that Twitter cannot dodge the “lions” coming for them.  The message reads:

“We told you from the beginning that this was not your war. How, Jack [Dorsey], will you protect your wretched employees when their necks are an official target for the soldiers of the caliphate and its allies who are scattered among your midst? How will you answer their families and their children since you embroiled them in this failed war?,” according to the post.

“Your virtual war against us on the internet will pull you into a real war on the ground. There is no escape: it is only a matter of time,  and perhaps one of the bloodthirsty crusading lions has already begun to move in reality.”

The online terrorist supporter continued: “Picture the scene: while one of Twitter’s employees leaves a nearby bar in the neighborhood, reeling and groping about him because of drink and the dark shadows [that have gathered] upon you, and if a lone lion stationed in the shadows should leap upon him and cut his throat, what would be in the way?”

The message also included a picture of Jack Dorsey in crosshairs.

Posted at 4:59 am on March 3rd, 2015 by

Wiesel on Iran: ‘When Evil Begins Its Work Don’t Give It Another Chance’

Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel will be in the House chamber to hear Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday.

But first, Wiesel stopped Monday at the Dirksen Senate office building — accompanied by his wife, coming straight from the airport — for a heart-to-heart with Israel supporters and a bank of TV cameras to remind America that “silence is not an option.”

Code Pink interrupted the meeting in the Senate hearing room, brandishing signs criticizing AIPAC and one that read “parking for Palestinians only.” Many of those who showed up to hear Wiesel bore lanyards from the AIPAC megaconference at D.C.’s convention center.

The crowd chanted “get out” at Code Pink, and organizer Rabbi Shmuley Boteach lectured the protesters after they grabbed hold of a mic. They were led out by Capitol Police before 86-year-old Wiesel arrived.

Boteach called Wiesel “the living face of the six million murdered in the Holocaust.”

“The privilege of hearing Elie Wiesel on any occasion is historic,” the rabbi explained, but Wiesel coming to Washington to support the Jewish state on the eve of Netanyahu’s address made it an especially “historic discussion.”

“I learned to rely not on the promises of our friends but the threats of our enemies,” Wiesel said. “When our enemies make threats, take them seriously.”

“…If they say so and they repeatedly say so we should take them seriously.”

Wiesel implored members of Congress in a February ad to attend Netanyahu’s address.

“It is important for him to speak, it’s important for the American people to listen to him,” he told Monday’s audience. “When the prime minister of Israel speaks it’s not a political event; it must be viewed in historic terms.”

Wiesel said that to feel OK about a deal with Iran, “I need proof that whatever I read about Iran is not so.”

“When evil begins its work don’t give it another chance,” he said.

Boteach noted that the professor would have the chance to assess a grade to Netanyahu’s speech. “I’m giving him an ‘A,’” Wiesel preemptively replied.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) was supposed to be at the event, but withdrew after Boteach ran a New York Times ad this past weekend calling out National Security Advisor Susan Rice’s “blind spot” on genocide, from Rwanda to the current administration negotiations with Iran.

“Since 1998, I have taken advantage of every opportunity to urge the toughest sanctions on Iran, including nearly twenty presentations at AIPAC policy conferences,” Sherman said in a statement. “I cannot appear at a forum which was advertised using an unwarranted incendiary personal attack. I will be working with Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, and others, to create appropriate forums to focus on the danger posed by Iran.”

At the event, Boteach said if the ad was “construed as a personal attack that was not our intent.”

“I personally want to offer an apology to anyone who was offended, including Ms. Rice herself,” he said.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was there, telling Wiesel “you are truly an American hero, a Jewish hero and a hero of the world.”

The senator met with Netanyahu earlier in the day and described the Israeli leader as “Churchillian.”

“This is not about powering the lights,” he said, referring to Iran’s claim that it wants nuclear power for peaceful energy purposes.

Posted at 9:46 pm on March 2nd, 2015 by

Menendez Pulls No Punches: Takes Shots at Rice, ‘Political Friends,’ Nuclear ‘Mothballing’

The Democratic author of Iran sanctions measures that have drawn ire from the Obama administration took aim at his critics and embraced his allies in a passionate address before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), the ranking member on the Foreign Relations Committee, also took a dig at National Security Advisor Susan Rice as he rallied the conference crowd in the speaking slot after the administration official.

“I take issue with those who say the prime minister’s visit to the United States is ‘destructive’ to U.S.-Israel relations,” Menendez said. Rice made such comments in an interview with PBS aired last week.

“And tomorrow I will be proud when I escort Prime Minister Netanyahu to the House Chamber to give his speech,” he continued. “To show him the respect he deserves from every American who cares about our relationship with the only true democracy in the Middle East.”

The senator stressed that “when it comes to defending the U.S.-Israel relationship, I am not intimidated by anyone — not Israel’s political enemies, and not by my political friends when I believe they’re wrong.”

Menendez noted the “political timing” of Netanyahu’s speech “may have been unfortunate,” but British Prime Minister David Cameron of Great Britain came to Washington in January to lobby Congress against Iran sanctions. “It seems to me that if it’s okay for one prime minister to express his views, it should be good for all prime ministers,” he said.

“…I know there are more than a few people here in Washington who say that I’m outspoken in my defense of Israel – and, frankly, I’m not only proud of it, I’m fully prepared to stand on this stage today – or on any stage anywhere, anytime – to carry that message to both the friends and enemies of Israel around the world.”

He also ripped at the administration’s goals for a nuclear deal, saying it “has to be built on more than mothballing Iran’s program – more than on an inspection-and-verification regime focused on monitoring a one-year breakout capability.”

“You can be certain, the mullahs are not going to call us in Washington when they decide to breach the agreement. They are going to sneak-out – covertly, gradually, over time – when they think we’re not looking, just as they have in the past and they are going to parse the words of this agreement and argue – as they have already – about whether a nuclear advancement technically violates the agreement,” Menendez said.

“…Here we are, near the end of negotiations, and the goal posts have moved from dismantlement to reconfiguration. From a peaceful nuclear program to just enough to detect break out. From no right-to-enrichment to getting an alarm system.”

And he got in another dig. “A deal cannot be built on trust alone. It cannot be built on hope. It cannot be built on aspirations or good intentions like the North Korea deal,” he said. A new report found that Pyongyang’s nuclear program is undergoing “significant expansion” that could results in a stockpile of 100 nuclear weapons by 2020.

“I can tell you one thing: as long as I have an ounce of fight left in me, as long as I have a vote and a say and a chance to protect the interest of Israel, the region, and the national security interests of the United States – Iran will never have a pathway to a weapon. It will never threaten Israel or its neighbors, and it will never be in a position to start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Not on my watch,” Menendez vowed.

He also said the world “must always have Israel’s back” when the Jewish state is being pushed to negotiate with a Palestinian regime that includes Hamas.

“We hope and pray for peace, but we must always have Israel’s back, and having Israel’s back means fighting back against efforts by any nation or any anti-Semitic terrorist group – any haters or Holocaust deniers who try to delegitimize Israel,” the senator said.

Menendez repeatedly earned enthusiastic standing ovations throughout his address.

“As I’ve said here many times and on many occasions, the Holocaust was the most sinister possible reminder that the Jewish people in exile lived in constant jeopardy. But while the Shoah is central to Israel’s identity, it was never the reason behind its founding, and it is not the main justification for Israel’s existence today,” he said. “The true justification is written in thousands of years of undeniable history that lead to an undeniable conclusion: the re-establishment of the State of Israel in modern times is the result of a political reality that has grown from strong, deep roots going back to the time of Abraham and Sarah.”

“The argument for Israel’s existence – the argument for its legitimacy – does not depend on what we might say in speeches.”

Posted at 9:01 pm on March 2nd, 2015 by

‘Increasing Global Hatred of Israel a Sign of Divine Help’: Ayatollah Live-Tweets AIPAC

 

 

 

 

Posted at 8:12 pm on March 2nd, 2015 by

Susan Rice’s Applause Track Off in AIPAC Address

YouTube Preview Image

National Security Advisor Susan Rice warmed up the crowd at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee convention this evening by demonstrating her grasp of Hebrew pronunciation, but it wasn’t enough to win their confidence on the nuts and bolts of her address — the administration’s nuclear negotiations with Iran.

“As President Obama has repeated many times: we are keeping all options on the table to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. As he said in Jerusalem: ‘Iran must not get a nuclear weapon. This is not a danger that can be contained.’ And he added, ‘America will do what we must to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran,’” Rice told the sellout crowd of 16,000 at the Washington Convention Center.

“President Obama said it. He meant it. And those are his orders to us all.”

Following the AIPAC tradition of not booing speakers but voicing their opinion by withholding their clapping, that line drew just a smattering of applause.

“With the Joint Plan of Action, we have already succeeded in halting Iran’s nuclear program and rolling it back in key areas. Let’s recall what has been achieved over the last year. Iran is doing away with its existing stockpile of its most highly enriched uranium. Iran has capped its stockpile of low enriched uranium. Iran has not constructed additional enrichment facilities. Iran has not installed or operated new centrifuges, including its next-generation models. Iran has stopped construction at its potential plutonium reactor at Arak. In short, Iran is further away from a nuclear weapon than it was a year ago—and that makes the world safer, including Israel,” Rice said. You could count the claps that garnered on a couple of hands.

Not that the audience was sleepwalking through the speech. When Rice said “a bad deal is worse than no deal,” the crowd leaped to its feet with applause.

She defined a “good deal,” then, as “one that would verifiably cut off every pathway for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.”

And there were lines that Rice’s speechwriter likely didn’t intend to be crowd favorites, but were.

“I know that some of you will be urging Congress to insist that Iran forego its domestic enrichment capacity entirely,” she said, sparking cheers and applause.

“But, as desirable as that would be, it is neither realistic nor achievable. Even our closest international partners in the P5+1 do not support denying Iran the ability ever to pursue peaceful nuclear energy. If that is our goal, our partners will abandon us, undermining the sanctions we have imposed so effectively together. Simply put, that is not a viable negotiating position. Nor is it even attainable. The plain fact is, no one can make Iran unlearn the scientific and nuclear expertise it already possesses.”

Then, Rice said, “I know that some argue we should just impose sanctions and walk away ” — another big applause line.

“Congress has played a hugely important role in helping to build our sanctions on Iran, but they shouldn’t play the spoiler now. Additional sanctions or restrictive legislation enacted during the negotiation would blow up the talks, divide the international community, and cause the United States to be blamed for the failure to reach a deal — putting us in a much weaker position and endangering the sanctions regime itself,” she said. “Meanwhile, the Iranians are well aware that if they walk away from a deal, Congress will pass new sanctions immediately — and President Obama will support them.”

Rice said at the beginning of her speech “all options on the table” — but toward the end of her speech maintained “there’s simply no alternative that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon better — or longer — than the type of deal we seek.”

“Sound bites won’t stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,” she said. “Strong diplomacy – backed by pressure – can. And, if diplomacy fails, let’s make it clear to the world that it is Iran’s responsibility.”

Obama’s advisor also tried to walk back her boss’ characterization of the “violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris.”

“And, when anti-Semitism rears its head around the world, when Jews at a kosher supermarket in Paris are singled out and murdered by terrorists, when synagogues are attacked and cemeteries defaced, we have to call it by name,” Rice said. “It’s hate. It’s anti-Semitism. It reminds us of the most terrible chapters of human history. It has no place in a civilized world, and we have to fight it.”

After Rice’s speech, the White House released her remarks as prepared for delivery rather than as delivered. The transcripts issued by the administration with remarks as delivered include indications of where audiences applauded.

 

Posted at 8:07 pm on March 2nd, 2015 by