The Iran Deal Is Already Blocked (Eze 17)


Boehner to ‘do everything’ to block Iran deal

By Deirdre Walsh and Ted Barrett CNN
Published On: Jul 22 2015 11:35:27 AM PDT
Updated On: Jul 23 2015 11:42:41 AM PDT

Hours before top Obama administration officials began briefing Congress on the classified details of the nuclear accord with Iran, House Speaker John Boehner vowed Republicans would “do everything possible to stop” the agreement.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, put the onus on the Obama administration to convince members on Capitol Hill the agreement deserved their support.
“It’s always the administration, not Congress, that carries the burden of proof in a debate of this nature,” McConnell said on the Senate floor. “And it seems the administration today has a long way to go with Democrats and Republicans alike.

Republicans are seizing on what they are calling a “side deal” Iran negotiated with the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding inspections as a reason to oppose the overall agreement.
GOP Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas questioned Kerry about “side deals” he said Iran negotiated with the International Atomic Energy Agency regarding inspections.

Kerry admitted he didn’t have all the details on those agreements, but expected to be briefed on them.
“It’s an enormous problem to be asked to vote on an agreement you have not seen in its totality,” Pompeo told reporters after the briefing. He insisted the “secret side deals” were important because they deal with “important verification processes that are going to take place with respect to Parchin, where there were suspected explosive device testing take place for Iran that were nuclear related.”
Pompeo and Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas — another top GOP opponent of the deal — sent a letter to Obama, along with Boehner and McConnell, demanding details of the supposed side deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency.

This week the White House has all hands on deck trying to prevent opponents from scuttling the deal. After Wednesday’s closed-door sessions with members, the first public hearing on the Iran agreement is slated for Thursday.

Secretary of State John Kerry, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz are expected to face tough questioning from members of both parties on Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

The campaign against the deal is also in full swing — roughly 40 House conservatives huddled for breakfast with Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Ron Dermer, who outlined a long list of objections to the nuclear agreement.

Dermer’s message, according to Iowa GOP Rep. Steve King, who hosted the meeting, was pretty straightforward: “Congress is the last stop to avoid this.”

King said much of discussion focused on what happens 10-12 years after the agreement is implemented. The Iowa Republican warned if opponents on Capitol Hill don’t shut it down now “then it paves the way not just for a nuclear Iran, but a very highly powered nuclear Iran that changes the dynamics in the region and changes the destiny of the world.”

Virginia Rep. Dave Brat, who also attended the meeting with Dermer, said the overall thrust of the conversation was “to pay less attention to all the details — the debate on centrifuges and years and committees and UN and all that — and pay more attention to who’s on the other side of the debate and that is Iran.”

The White House got good news Tuesday night when Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat, announced he would support the bill.

He called the agreement “an historic opportunity to once and for all prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, something no administration or Congress has yet to accomplish.”
“Given a choice between the invasion or Iran or working in a diplomatic fashion toward a negotiation so that we can lessen this threat to the world, I think President Obama made the right choice,” Durbin, a close ally of the President, said in a Senate floor speech.

But Republicans rejected the notion that the only choice before the Senate was to accept the agreement or go to war.

“There is a third choice,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 GOP senator. “There are tougher sanctions that will bring Iran to the table for a better deal and a good deal. It’s simply unacceptable for the President to be misrepresenting what the options are to Congress and the American people.”
Sen. Dan Coats, a respected Senate veteran who sits on the intelligence committee, echoed that view.
“We must ignore the coming public relations campaign that will trumpet this deal as a victory for diplomacy and the false premise that the deal is a choice between peace and war,” Coats said on the floor.

Of the deal itself, he said, “The more I read, the more my concern grows.”

Durbin is in charge of counting votes for the Democrats. In recent days he’s said is uncertain if there will be enough Democrats to either successfully block the a resolution of disapproval from coming to the floor or to sustain the President’s expected veto of it if it passes. He said his fellow Democratic senators must first read the agreement and hear the administration’s briefings before deciding.
Currently there are about 15 Senate Democrats who could vote against the deal. If they joined Republicans against it they could override a veto. Already those 15 are the subject of heavy lobbying by the forces for and against the agreement and will likely face intense pressure in the roughly 60 days before Congress must vote on the deal.

In the House where GOP opposition appears virtually unanimous, the President would need 145 Democrats to help him sustain a veto. The top House Democrat, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, endorsed the deal last week, which was a big win for the administration, and she expressed confidence members of her party would back the President.

Democratic Rep. Dan Lipinski of Illinois, didn’t like Kerry’s tone in the Wednesday meeting.
“I would appreciate if the secretary showed a little more respect for members of Congress,” he said.
He declined to say specifically what the secretary of state said that was so off putting.

Another Democrat, Rep Jim Himes of Connecticut, said he was still studying the Iran agreement, but said Kerry and other Cabinet officials gave “a very, very strong defense of the deal” and “they are making a lot of headway.”

Himes said administration officials urged members to view the deal in context of where Iran was recently — on the threshold of obtaining nuclear capabilities – and where they are now.

“From my standpoint the burden of proof, given what I’ve learned so far, is for the opponents to explain why this is a bad deal relative to where we were and why this a bad deal relative to where we will be if the United States unilaterally walks away from it.”

Number 3 Advises Against Nuclear Deal (Eze 17)

Boehner: I’d applaud Obama for leaving Iran talks


House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he would applaud President Obama for walking away from talks over Iran’s nuclear program because “no deal is better than a bad deal.

“From everything that’s leaked from these negotiations, the administration’s backed away from almost all of the guidelines that they set up for themselves. And I don’t want to see a bad deal. And so if, in fact, there’s no agreement, the sanctions are gonna go back in place,” Boehner said in an interview with “Face the Nation” host John Dickerson that aired Sunday.

The talks have dragged nearly two weeks beyond the initial June 30 deadline by which six world powers and Iran were supposed to finalize an agreement. A framework agreement reached earlier this year would limit but not entirely eliminate Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for a gradual lifting of certain international sanctions. But negotiators are still hung up over a handful of issues, including the scope of access United Nations inspectors will have to nuclear sites and how to handle international sanctions that ban Iran from buying or selling missiles and conventional weapons.
Boehner said the Iranian regime must abandon its efforts to create a nuclear weapon and stop 
sponsoring terror groups around the world. If those two things don’t happen, he said, “we’ll have a standoff.

But that option, Boehner added, is “a lot better than legitimizing this rogue regime,” which is what would happen if there is a deal.

Boehner on Hillary Clinton: “She’s not telling the truth

Boehner also talked about the House’s ongoing investigation of the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, and former Secretary of State Clinton’s role in the aftermath. A House committee investigating the attacks has spent months trying to obtain all of Clinton’s email about the attacks after it was revealed that she used a private email server while serving in the Obama administration.

In a CNN interview last week, Clinton said, “everything I did was permitted by law and regulation.”
In response, Boehner said, “We are not going to walk away from this.” With the State Department sending the committee about 4,000 emails per month, he predicted that the committee would be gathering documents for the rest of the year.

Boehner isn’t ruling out issuing a subpoena for the email server, something the committee investigating the Benghazi attacks does not have the authority to do.

“I’m not going to rule in or out any of those options. I would hope we wouldn’t have to do that,” Boehner said. “She wants this investigation over, she wants this all to be cleaned up. But the fact is it’s not going to be cleaned up until we get the emails.”

Boehner did say, however, that investigator general at the State Department should be the one to go after the server, because they are the appropriate people to determine what should and shouldn’t be public. Plus, he said, “Congress doesn’t want the server.”

He predicted that Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders will give Clinton “a real run for her money” in the Democratic primary but said that both candidates are “out of step with mainstream America” because “there’s no limit to the number of taxes that Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton want to raise.”

Boehner was more reticent to weigh in on the crowded field of Republican candidates competing for the GOP nomination in 2016. Asked whether Trump was helping or hurting the party with his recent comments about Mexican immigrants, Boehner said, “I don’t know whether he’s helping or hurting, but he’s a candidate.”

He said, “certainly, I disagree” with Trump’s comments and that other candidates “have much more responsible positions.”

One dimension of the immigration debate has been sanctuary cities, areas where local officials are prevented from helping the federal government enforce immigration laws. San Francisco, where a young woman was recently shot and killed by an immigrant in the U.S. illegally who had been deported five times, is one such city.

“These are laws. They are on the books. They are required to be enforced. There’s no ifs, ands or buts here. And the fact is that some cities have decided to ignore the law, uh– is wrong. It’s flat out wrong,” Boehner said.

He reiterated his position that President Obama is responsible for the larger failure of immigration reform legislation, saying, he “stirred up the American people in such a way that it would almost be impossible to do immigration reform” by addressing it executive orders.

He said Congress shouldn’t just send the president a bill — even one that he would veto — because there has been “a lot of bipartisan work done” on the issue for many years.

“I don’t think there’s that big of a difference in terms of how to reform our immigration laws,” Boehner said.

As he talked about Pope Francis’ upcoming visit to the U.S., including a speech to Congress, Boehner said it has taken 20 years and three different invitations to get the head of the Catholic Church to come to D.C.

“I’m really happy that the pope has accepted my invitation. You know, for a kid who grew up goin’ to mass every morning, it’s a pretty humbling experience,” he said.

A practicing Catholic, Boehner described his faith as “very deep.”

“I have my conversations with the Lord. They start in the morning early and they go on all day long. You can’t do this job by yourself,” he said.

Republicans Prepare For the Fall (Ezekiel 17)

Boehner and Netanyahu

Washington – U.S. House Speaker Boehner Calls Iran Nuclear Deal ‘Alarming’

Published on: April 2, 2015 04:18 PM
By: Reuters

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (R) looks at the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, John Boehner, as they deliver statements in Jerusalem April 1, 2015. Reuters

Washington – A framework nuclear deal announced on Thursday between Iran and world powers is an “alarming departure” from President Barack Obama’s initial goals, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner said.

Boehner did not outline how the deal departed from initial negotiating goals. But he said Congress must fully review the deal before any sanctions on Iran are lifted.

“In the weeks ahead, Republicans and Democrats in Congress will continue to press this administration on the details of these parameters and the tough questions that remain unanswered,” Boehner said.

A Hypocrite Would Know A Hypocrite (Rev 13)

<header class="content__head tonal__head tonal__head–tone-news



Boehner: Iran has ‘no intention’ of keeping its word on nuclear deal

<div class="content__meta-container js-football-meta u-cf


“ style=“border-bottom-color: #dfdfdf; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 0.0625rem; border-top-color: #dfdfdf; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-width: 0.0625rem; margin-bottom: 0.75rem; min-height: 2.25rem; position: relative;“>

<div class="content__meta-container js-football-meta u-cf


“ style=“border-bottom-color: #dfdfdf; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-width: 0.0625rem; border-top-color: #dfdfdf; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-width: 0.0625rem; margin-bottom: 0.75rem; min-height: 2.25rem; position: relative;“>

The top Republican’s comments came as negotiations in Lausanne approached the 31 March deadline for the drafting of a framework for a deal, under intense criticism from Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu.
Speaking on CNN, Boehner said he had serious doubts about the talks. 
“We’ve got a regime that’s never quite kept their word about anything,” he said. “I just don’t understand why we would sign an agreement with a group of people who have no intention of keeping their word.”
If there was no agreement, Boehner said he would move “very” quickly to impose new sanctions on Iran.
“The sanctions are going to come and they are going to come quickly,” he said.
“I think the animosity exhibited by this administration toward the prime minister of Israel is reprehensible,” said Boehner. “And I think the pressure they have put on him over the past four or five years frankly pushed him to the point where he had to speak up.”
Boehner said Netanyahu had clearly highlighted the threat he said Iran’s nuclear programme represents, “not only to the Middle East but to the rest of the world”.
Netanyahu denounced the talks once again on Sunday. “I am deeply troubled by the emerging agreement with Iran in the nuclear talks,” he said at the start of a cabinet meeting. “The agreement confirms all of our fears and even worse.”
Boehner said: “The president doesn’t want to talk about [Iran]. Doesn’t want to talk about the fact that he has no strategy to deal with it. When you begin to see all these leaks that presumably came out of the White House about what the Iranian deal was going to be, there is a lot of concern in Congress on a bipartisan basis.”