Hillarious' lack of it is clear evidence. (See 1a below.)
Hillarious' Negatives:
Liar, un-trustworthiness, terrible Sec. of State record, un-liked, ratings are low, no record of leadership capability, trail of negative history and FBI investigation hanging over her head
Positives: Demwits have no alternative, plenty of money, has proven can hold her own because she has learned how to evade and deny, lusts to be president and will do whatever it takes to win and finally has the "vaginal vote" that can tip the scale in her favor as first female president..
Hillarious is not the only dingbat. There re others! (See 1b below.)
Lying is what they do for a living! (See 1c below.)
This from a dear friend and fellow memo reader: "SHE, AND BILLY-BOY ARE EXPERT DECEIVERS, AND LIARS THAT HAVE BROUGHT METHODS OF DECEPTION TO A LEVEL NEVER BEFORE EVEN ATTEMPTED BY PUBLIC FIGURES. THEY DO IT AS AN IMPERATIVE OR AS NECESSARY , THEN DENY IT LATER ,BY FOGGING THE SITUATION IN EXPERT FASHION. S--"
===
You will not see or hear about this in any American press or media source. (See 2 below.)
===
Speaker Ryan and where he is coming from. (See 3 below.)
===
Dick
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Benghazi and Character
In public Clinton blamed a video. In private she knew better.
The House Benghazi hearing Thursday with Hillary Clinton featured plenty of partisan brawling, but don’t believe those who say we learned nothing. The hearing turned up new information that relates directly to the former Secretary of State’s political character and judgment as a potential Commander in Chief.
The select committee led by Republican Trey Gowdy of South Carolina released hitherto undisclosed documents showing that Mrs. Clinton believed from the start that the attack was perpetrated by terrorists.
At 11:12 p.m. on the night of the attack, Sept. 11, 2012, Mrs. Clinton emailed her daughter Chelsea that, “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al-Qaeda-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked and a young communications officer on temporary duty w[ith] a wife and two young children. Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow.” Her empathy is admirable, but presumably she was telling her daughter what she really believed.
The committee also released a State Department summary of Mrs. Clinton’s call the next day, Sept. 12, with Egypt’s Prime Minister. “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest,” Mrs. Clinton said. The call summary then blocks out a comment by the Egyptian, to which Mrs. Clinton replies, “Your [sic] not kidding. Based on the information we saw today we believe the group that claimed responsibility for this was affiliated with al Qaeda.”
“Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”This matters because it precedes what became the Administration’s original story that the Benghazi attack had been motivated by an anti-Muslim Internet video (“the film,” as Mrs. Clinton put it to the Egyptian). The State Department issued a statement under Mrs. Clinton’s name on the night of the attack hinting at the video motivation:
If Mrs. Clinton was telling people privately that it was a terror attack, why hint publicly at some other motivation? Keep in mind that this was in the heat of an election campaign in which one of President Obama’s main themes was that al Qaeda was all but defeated. If an al Qaeda offshoot could kill a sitting U.S. Ambassador for the first time in 30 years, that narrative would have been shown to be false.
The following Sunday Susan Rice, then U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., went on national television and blamed the attacks on the video. Mrs. Clinton knew that was false, yet the Secretary of State who was responsible for the safety of Ambassador Christopher Stevens never spoke up to contradict Ms. Rice’s statement. Mrs. Clinton also told the father of one of the victims that the U.S. would have the creator of the anti-Muslim video prosecuted. She was spinning the false tale there too.
All of this is no mere game of gotcha. Mrs. Clinton’s private-public contradiction goes to the honesty of a public official whose obligation was to protect Americans and who now wants a promotion to the Oval Office. It shows that her first instinct even on a matter of life and death was to help the Administration conceal the nature of the Benghazi attack—at least until more facts came out about the terrorist assault and the video story became indefensible.
With Joe Biden’s departure from the race this week, Mrs. Clinton has the Democratic Party nomination all but wrapped. Only some new disclosure or a criminal action by the FBI and Justice Department can prevent it. That was clear enough from the behavior of Democrats on the Benghazi committee as they sought to form a protective shield around her. They know she’s all they’ve got.
The media cover these hearings mainly as a public show about who won or lost, and Mrs. Clinton will get points for her cool. But we recommend that our readers take a look on the Web at the exchange over the emails between Congressman Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) and Mrs. Clinton. See for yourself if her calculated and well-acted evasions inspire confidence as a potential President.
1a) She Knew All Along
The House hearing on Benghazi reveals that Hillary Clinton’s spin about the attack was a politically expedient fiction.
Thanks to Hillary Clinton’s Benghazi testimony on Thursday, we now understand why the former secretary of state never wanted anyone to see her emails and why the State Department sat on documents. Turns out those emails and papers show that the Obama administration deliberately misled the nation about the deadly events in Libya on Sept. 11, 2012.
Don’t forget how we came to this point. Mrs. Clinton complained in her testimony on Capitol Hill that past Congresses had never made the overseas deaths of U.S. officials a “partisan” issue. That’s because those past deaths had never inspired an administration to concoct a wild excuse for their occurrence, in an apparent attempt to avoid blame for a terror attack in a presidential re-election year.
The early hints that this is exactly what happened after the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans cast doubt on every White House-issued “fact” about the fiasco and led to the establishment of Rep. Trey Gowdy’s select committee.
What that House committee did Thursday was finally expose the initial deception. To understand the willful depth of that trickery, let’s briefly recall the history.
In early September 2012, at the Democratic National Convention, Vice President Joe Biden summarized to thunderous applause the administration’s re-election pitch: “Osama bin Laden is dead, and General Motors is alive.” Translation: The president had revived the economy, even as he had put “al Qaeda on the run,” as Mr. Obama put it. Five days later, four Americans in Benghazi were dead. It appeared the White House had slept through a terror attack on the anniversary of 9/11.
The administration instead immediately presented the attack as a spontaneous mob backlash to an anti-Muslim YouTube video. At 10:30 on the night of the attack, Mrs. Clinton issued a statement about the violence, blaming the video. She repeated the charge in a speech the next day. President Obama gave his own speech that day, referring to the video and refusing to use the word “terrorism.”
The next day, Mrs. Clinton mentioned the video twice more. The day after that, Press Secretary Jay Carney said: “We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.” Mrs. Clinton promised the father of one of the victims that the administration would “make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted.” In his weekly address, Mr. Obama talked about the video. When the Libyan president said there was evidence the attack was planned months in advance, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice contradicted him. She instead told five Sunday talk shows—five days after the attack—that “based on the best information we have to date,” the attack “began spontaneously” in response to “this hateful video.” Mr. Obama for two full weeks continued to talk about YouTube.
Here’s what the Benghazi committee found in Thursday’s hearing. Two hours into Mrs. Clinton’s testimony, Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan referred to an email Mrs. Clinton sent to her daughter, Chelsea, at 11:12 the night of the attack, or 45 minutes after the secretary of state had issued a statement blaming YouTube-inflamed mobs. Her email reads: “Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group.” Mrs. Clinton doesn’t hedge in the email; no “it seems” or “it appears.” She tells her daughter that on the anniversary of 9/11 an al Qaeda group assassinated four Americans.
That same evening, Mrs. Clinton spoke on the phone with Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf, around 8 p.m. The notes from that conversation, in a State Department email, describe her as saying:
“We have asked for the Libyan government to provide additional security to the compound immediately as there is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for.” Ansar al Sharia is al Qaeda’s affiliate on the Arabian Peninsula. So several hours into the attack, Mrs. Clinton already believed that al Qaeda was attacking U.S. facilities.
“We have asked for the Libyan government to provide additional security to the compound immediately as there is a gun battle ongoing, which I understand Ansar as Sharia [sic] is claiming responsibility for.” Ansar al Sharia is al Qaeda’s affiliate on the Arabian Peninsula. So several hours into the attack, Mrs. Clinton already believed that al Qaeda was attacking U.S. facilities.
The next afternoon, Mrs. Clinton had a call with the Egyptian Prime Minister Hesham Kandil. The notes from it are absolutely damning. The secretary of state tells him: “We know that the attack in Libya had nothing to do with the film. It was a planned attack—not a protest.” And yet Mrs. Clinton, and Ms. Rice and Mr. Obama for days and days continued to spin the video lie.
In other news Thursday, Judicial Watch unveiled a new cable, sent the day after the attack, from the Defense Intelligence Agency to the State Department Command Center. It explains that the attack was carried out by a “Salafi terrorism group” in “retaliation for the killing of an Al Qaeda operative.”
The cable says “the attack was an organized operation with specific information that the U.S. Ambassador was present.” The cable included details about the group’s movements and the weapons it used in the assault.
Count on the Obama administration to again resort to blaming “confusing” and “conflicting” information at the time for its two-week spin. That was Mrs. Clinton’s flimsy excuse at the hearing. But her own conversations prove she was in no doubt about what happened—while it was still happening.
Democrats on the committee spent most of the hearing complaining that it was a waste of time and money. Quite the opposite. It was invaluable, for the clarity provided by those three emails alone.
1b) Quote of the day by Dianne Feinstein.......
Dianne Feinstein: "All vets are mentally ill in some way and government should prevent them from owning firearms." Yep, - she really said it on Thursday in a meeting in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.... And the quote below from the LA Times is priceless.
Sometimes even the L.A. Times gets it right.
Kurt Nimmo: "Senator Feinstein insults all U.S. Veterans as she flays about in a vain attempt to save her anti-firearms bill."
Quote of the Day from the Los Angeles Times:
Columnist Burt Prelutsky, Los Angeles Times
Kurt Nimmo: "Senator Feinstein insults all U.S. Veterans as she flays about in a vain attempt to save her anti-firearms bill."
Quote of the Day from the Los Angeles Times:
"Frankly, I don't know what it is about California, but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office. I'm not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine, even comes close.
When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we're Number One. There's no getting around the fact that the last time anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, and Nancy Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on ' Macbeth '. The four of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift of blab. You don't know if you should condemn them for their stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words."
Columnist Burt Prelutsky, Los Angeles Times
1c) Famous Presidential Lies Contest
LBJ:
On JCPOA Sets Nine Conditions Nullifying Original Agreement Announced July
14, 2015
By: Y. Carmon and A. Savyon*
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/8813.htm
On October 21, 2015, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei published a letter
of guidelines to Iranian President Hassan Rohani on the execution of the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The letter's publication
coincides with the days of the Ashura that are of vital religious and
national significance in Iran and symbolize steadfastness against the forces
of evil. Intended as an historical document aimed at assuring Iran's future,
the letter was posted on Khamenei's website in Persian and tweeted from his
Twitter account and posted on his Facebook page in English (see Appendices),
and published in English by the official Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting authority IRIB (see below). The letter is now a founding
document in all things concerning the JCPOA and the conditions under which
Iran will be willing to execute it.
The letter, defined by Khamenei on his website as "conditional approval" of
the JCPOA, sets several new conditions for Iran's execution of the
agreement. These conditions constitute late and unilateral additions to the
agreement concluded three months previously that fundamentally change it.
Khamenei stresses that the agreement awaits his opinion following what he
calls "precise and responsible examination" in the Majlis and "clearance of
this agreement through legal channels" in Iran's Supreme National Security
Council.
It should be further noted that in his introduction to the new conditions,
Khamenei attacks the U.S. and President Obama with great hostility, and
calls for Obama to be prosecuted by international judiciary institutions. He
states that Obama had sent him two letters declaring that he has no
intention of subverting the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran, but adds
that the U.S.'s support for fitna in Iran (i.e. the popular post-election
unrest in 2009), its monetary aid to opponents of the Republic, and its
explicit threats to attack Iran have proven the opposite and have exposed
the real intent of America's leaders, whose enmity towards Iran will not
end. He wrote that the Americans' behavior in the nuclear talks is another
link in the chain of its enmity towards Iran, that America entered into the
talks with the aim of "deception," and that therefore Iran must remain alert
in light of America's hostile intentions.
The set of conditions laid out by Khamenei creates a situation in which not
only does the Iranian side refrain from approving the JCPOA,[1] but, with
nearly every point, creates a separate obstacle, such that executing the
agreement is not possible.
The following are Khamenei's nine conditions, and their implications:
Khamenei's Conditions For Iranian Execution Of The JCPOA
First condition: Khamenei demands that the U.S. and Europe lift the
sanctions, not suspend them, and in addition demands "solid and sufficient"
guarantees in advance that this will be done, before Iran takes its own
steps and meets its own obligations under the agreement. These guarantees,
insists Khamenei, must include, inter alia, an official letter from the U.S.
president and from the EU undertaking to fully lift the sanctions.
Furthermore, he demands that this letter will state that any declaration by
the West that the "structure of the sanctions will remain in force" (i.e.
allowing snapback) will be considered "non-compliance with the JCPOA" on the
part of the West.
Implications: These conditions constitute a total change of the JCPOA.
Khamenei is not allowing any execution of the JCPOA by Iran until this is
accepted in writing by the other side, and thus he is nullifying the JCPOA
as agreed upon on July 14, 2015.
Second condition: Any sanctions against Iran "at every level and on every
pretext," including terrorism and human rights violations, by any one of the
countries participating in the negotiations will "constitute a violation of
the JCPOA," and a reason for Iran to stop executing the agreement.
Implications: This demand, that links the JCPOA to other issues and
prohibits any punishment of Iran on any issue and for any reason, serves as
an excuse for Iran to cancel the agreement.
Third condition: Under the JCPOA, Iran is obligated, following the JCPOA's
Adoption Day, to carry out its obligations concerning changing the function
of the nuclear reactor at Arak and shipping out most of its stockpile of
enriched uranium. Contrary to this, Khamenei is changing the timetable of
the JCPOA, stating that Iran will not carry out these actions until after
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declares that it is closing
its dossier on Iran's "past and future issues (including the so-called
Possible Military Dimensions or PMD of Iran's nuclear program)."
Implications: This demand to change the timetable creates a situation in
which Iran will not take action as stipulated in the JCPOA, and will not
meet its obligations, before the sanctions are eased, also according to the
JCPOA, but instead dictates that the sanctions must first be lifted
completely and states that only then will Iran meet its obligations.
Khamenei here is creating a situation in which the IAEA will not be able to
report on Iran's meeting of its obligations regarding the Arak reactor and
regarding the shipping out of its enriched uranium by the target date of
December 15, 2015, because Iran is not going to do so by then – thus the
execution of the agreement is thwarted from the beginning.
Fourth condition: Iran will meet its obligations to "renovate" and change
the purpose of the Arak reactor only after there is a signed agreement on an
"alternative plan" for changes to the reactor, and after there is
"sufficient guarantee" that this alternative plan will be implemented.
Implications: Iran's fulfillment of its obligations regarding the Arak
reactor, as stipulated by the JCPOA, will be postponed until some unknown
future date.
Fifth condition: Iran will carry out its obligation to ship out its enriched
uranium to another country in exchange for yellowcake "on a gradual basis
and on numerous occasions," and only after "a secure agreement has been
clinched to that effect, along with sufficient guarantees" that this
exchange will be implemented.
Implications: The date for Iran to ship out its enriched uranium as
stipulated by the JCPOA is postponed until some unknown future date.
Khamenei is demanding that Iran receive in exchange for the enriched uranium
not raw uranium as per the JCPOA, but instead uranium that has been
enriched, albeit to a lower level than the uranium it ships out. This is yet
another change to the JCPOA as concluded on July 14, 2015.
Sixth condition: Khamenei instructs President Rohani to begin, along with
reducing Iran's ability to enrich uranium under the JCPOA, immediately to
expand Iran's ability to enrich uranium with a 15-year long-term plan for
190,000 centrifuge SWU (Separative Work Units). "This plan," he says, "must
allay any concern stemming from some points entailed in the JCPOA
appendices."
Implications: This article nullifies the declared goal of the JCPOA, which
is to reduce Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities.
Seventh condition: The Iranian Atomic Energy Organization must ensure
continued nuclear research and development, in its various dimensions, such
that in eight years' time, Iran will not be lacking in enrichment
technology. This, he says, is all in accordance with the JCPOA.
Eighth condition: In the event of doubt or ambiguity regarding the content
of the JCPOA, the source of authority for removing this doubt or ambiguity
will be the content of the talks – i.e. it will also include the statements
by the Iranian side, not just the "interpretation provided by the opposite
party," that is, the P5+1.
Implications: Any doubt or ambiguity regarding the content of the JCPOA will
become the source of unending dispute and will paralyze any possibility of
executing the agreement.
Ninth condition: Due to apprehensions that the other side, particularly the
U.S., will break its promises or cheat, President Rohani must establish a
"well-informed and smart panel" to monitor the execution of the agreement.
Implications: Khamenei is creating an administrative framework for perpetual
delays in the execution of the agreement.
Khamenei adds also a 10th condition, directed at Iran, not the P5+1,
demanding that Rohani take seriously his instructions in the matter of the
"resistance economy," the main thrust of which is self-reliance instead of
basing Iran's economy on external sources. He also demands that after the
sanctions are lifted, there will be no "unbridled imports," and no imports
whatsoever from the U.S.
Political Ramifications In Iran
In February 2016, elections for the Majlis and the Assembly of Experts are
set to take place in Iran. The pragmatic camp, headed by Hashemi Rafsanjani
and President Rohani, had hoped that a quick execution of the agreement
would allow the sanctions to be eased and funds to be released immediately,
which in turn would allow the pragmatic camp to present these achievements
and triumph in the elections. By setting these conditions, however, Khamenei
has thwarted any speedy execution of the agreement, and thus has thwarted
the pragmatic camp's hope for electoral success.
IRIB Translation
The following is the official English translation of Khamenei's letter, as
published by IRIB.[2] This translation was tweeted by Khamenei and also
posted on his Facebook page (see Appendix I and II).
"Wednesday, 21 October 2015 17:41
"Ayatollah Khamenei sends a letter to President Hassan Rouhani about the
JCPOA
"Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a
letter to President Hassan Rouhani, who also heads the Supreme National
Security Council (SNSC), referred to the precise and responsible examination
of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the Islamic
Consultative Assembly (parliament) and also the SNSC, and the clearance of
this agreement through legal channels, and issued important instructions
regarding the observation of and safeguarding the country’s national
interests. Enumerating nine-point requirements for the implementation of the
JCPOA, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei endorsed SNSC Resolution 634, dated August 10,
2015, provided that the following provisions and requirements are observed.
"The full text of Ayatollah Khamenei’s letter follows on:
"In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
"Your Excellency, Mr Rouhani,
"President of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Head of the Supreme National
Security Council
"May God bestow success upon you.
"Greetings to You
"The agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has
already been cleared through legal channels following precise and
responsible examinations in the Islamic Consultative Assembly,
[parliamentary] ad hoc committees and other committees as well as the
Supreme National Security Council. Since the agreement is waiting for my
view, I deem it necessary to remind several points so that Your Excellency
and other officials directly or indirectly involved in the issue would have
enough time to comply with and safeguard national interests and the country’s
best interests.
"1. Before anything else, I deem it necessary to extend my gratitude to all
those involved in this challenging procedure throughout all its periods,
including the recent nuclear negotiating team whose members tried their best
in explaining the positive points and incorporating all those points [into
the agreement], critics who reminded all of us of weak points through their
appreciable meticulousness, and particularly the chairman and members of the
Majlis ad hoc committee [set up to review the JCPOA] as well as the senior
members of the SNSC who covered some voids by including their important
considerations, and finally the Speaker of Majlis and Members of Parliament
who adopted a cautious bill to show the right way of implementation [of the
agreement] to the administration, and also national media and the country’s
journalists who despite all their differences of view presented a complete
image of this agreement to public opinion. This voluminous collection of
activity and endeavors and thoughts [spent] on an issue which is thought to
be among the unforgettable and instructive issues of the Islamic Republic,
deserves appreciation and is a source of satisfaction. Therefore, one can
say with certainty that the divine reward for these responsible
contributions will, God willing, include assistance and mercy and guidance
by Almighty God because the divine promises of assistance in exchange for
assisting His religion are unbreakable.
"2. Enjoying decades-long background of presence in the very details of the
affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, you must have naturally realized
that the government of the United States of America, neither in the nuclear
issue nor in any other issue, had been pursuing no other approach but
hostility and disturbance, and is unlikely to do otherwise in the future
either. The remarks by the US President [Barack Obama] in two letters
addressed to me on the point that [Washington] has no intention of
subverting the Islamic Republic of Iran turned out to be unreal and his open
threats of military and even nuclear strike, which can result in a lengthy
indictment against him in international courts, laid bare the real
intentions of US leaders. Political pundits and public opinion of many
nations clearly understand that the case of his never-ending hostility is
the nature and identity of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is born out
of the Islamic Revolution. Insistence on rightful Islamic stances and
opposition to the hegemonic and arrogant system, perseverance against
excessive demands and encroachment upon oppressed nations, revelations on
the US support for medieval dictators and suppression of independent
nations, incessant defense for the Palestinian nation and patriotic
resistance groups, rational and globally popular yelling at the usurping
Zionist regime constitute the main items which make the US regime’s enmity
against the Islamic Republic inevitable, and this enmity will continue as
long as the Islamic Republic [continues to] disappoint them with its
internal and sustainable strength.
"The behavior and words of the US government in the nuclear issue and its
prolonged and boring negotiations showed that this (nuclear issue) was also
another link in their chain of hostile enmity with the Islamic Republic.
Their deception through flip-flopping between their initial remarks that
came after Iran accepted to hold direct talks with them and their constant
non-compliance with their pledges throughout two-year-long negotiations and
their alignment with the demands of the Zionist regime and their bullying
diplomacy regarding relations with European governments and bodies involved
in the negotiations are all indicative of the fact that the US’s deceitful
involvement in the nuclear negotiations has been done not with the intention
of a fair settlement [of the case], but with the ill intention of pushing
ahead with its hostile objectives about the Islamic Republic.
"Doubtlessly, vigilance vis-à-vis the hostile intentions of the US
government and instances of resistance on the part of the officials of the
Islamic Republic of Iran throughout the negotiations managed, in numerous
cases, to prevent heavy damage from being inflicted [upon Iran].
"However, the outcome of the negotiations, which is enshrined in the JCPOA,
has numerous ambiguities and structural weaknesses that could inflict big
damage on the present and the future of the country in the absence of
meticulous and constant monitoring.
"3. The nine-point provisions entailed in the recent bill adopted by the
Majlis and the 10-point instructions outlined in the resolution of the
Supreme National Security Council carry helpful and effective points which
must be taken into consideration. Meantime, there are some other necessary
points which are announced here while some of the points mentioned in the
two documents are highlighted.
"First, since Iran has accepted to negotiate basically for the objective of
removal of unjust economic and financial sanctions and its enforcement (the
lifting of sanctions) is tied to Iran’s future actions under the JCPOA, it
is necessary that solid and sufficient guarantees be arranged to avoid any
infraction by the opposite parties. Written declaration by the US president
and the European Union for the lifting of the sanctions is among them. In
the statements of the EU and the US president, it must be reiterated that
these sanctions will be fully lifted. Any declaration that the structure of
the sanctions will remain in force shall imply non-compliance with the
JCPOA.
"Second, throughout the eight-year period, any imposition of sanctions at
any level and under any pretext (including repetitive and fabricated
pretexts of terrorism and human rights) on the part of any of the countries
involved in the negotiations will constitute a violation of the JCPOA and
the [Iranian] government would be obligated to take the necessary action as
per Clause 3 of the Majlis bill and stop its activities committed under the
JCPOA .
"Third, the measures related to what is mentioned in the next two clauses
will start only after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
announces [the conclusion of] the past and future issues (including the
so-called Possible Military Dimensions or PMD of Iran’s nuclear program).
"Fourth, measures to renovate the Arak plant by preserving its heavy [water]
nature will start only after a firm and secure agreement has been signed on
an alternative plan, along with sufficient guarantees for its
implementation.
"Fifth, the deal with a foreign government for swapping enriched uranium
with yellow cake will start only after a secure agreement has been clinched
to that effect, along with sufficient guarantees [for its implementation].
The aforesaid deal and exchange must be done on a gradual basis and on
numerous occasions.
"Sixth, by virtue of the Majlis bill, the plan and the necessary
preparations for mid-term development of the atomic energy industry, which
includes the method of advancement in different periods of time for 15 years
for the final objective of 190,000 SWU, must be drawn up and carefully
reviewed by the Supreme National Security Council. This plan must allay any
concern stemming from some points entailed in the JCPOA appendices.
"Seventh, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran must organize research and
development in different aspects such that after the end of the eight-year
period, there would be no shortage of technology for the level of [uranium]
enrichment entailed in the JCPOA.
"Eighth, it must be noted that on the ambiguous points in the JCPOA
document, the interpretation provided by the opposite party is not
acceptable and the reference would be the text of the negotiations.
"Ninth, the existence of complications and ambiguities in the text of the
JCPOA and the suspicion of breach of promise, infractions and deception by
the opposite party, particularly the US, require that a well-informed and
smart panel be established to monitor the progress of affairs and [gauge]
the opposite party’s commitment and realization of what was mentioned above.
The composition and the tasks of this would-be panel should be determined
and approved by the Supreme National Security Council.
"In witness whereof, Resolution 634, dated August 10, 2015, of the Supreme
National Security Council, is endorsed pending the observation of the
aforementioned points.
"In conclusion, as it has been notified in numerous meetings to you and
other government officials and also to our dear people in public gatherings,
although the lifting of sanctions is a necessary job in order to remove
injustice [imposed on people] and regain the rights of the Iranian nation,
economic overture and better livelihood and surmounting the current
challenges will not be easy unless the Economy of Resistance is taken
seriously and followed up on entirely. It is hoped that this objective will
be pursued with full seriousness and special attention would be paid to
enhancing national production. You should also watch out so that unbridled
imports would not follow the lifting of sanctions, and particularly
importing any consumer materials from the US must be seriously avoided.
"I pray to Almighty God for your and other contributors’ success.
"Source: www. leader. ir"
*Y. Carmon is President of MEMRI; A. Savyon is Director of the MEMRI Iran
Project.
Appendix I: Khamenei's Letter On Twitter[3]
Appendix II: Khamenei's Letter On Facebook[4]
Endnotes:
[1] See: MEMRI TV Clip No. 5114, Iranian Guardian Council Secretary-General
Ahmad Jannati: Khamenei Has Not Approved or Signed the JCPOA, October 16,
2015; MEMRI TV Clip No. 5117, Iranian Guardian Council Spokesman Nejatollah
Ebrahimian: The JCPOA Was Not Approved by the Majlis or the Guardian
Council, October 18, 2015; MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No.1192, The Iranian
Majlis Has Not Approved The JCPOA But Iran's Amended Version Of It, October
13, 2015; MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6191, Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei,
Iranian Officials Speak Out Against Iranian Approval Of JCPOA October 18,
2015.
[2]
English.irib.ir/news/leader/item/217470-ayatollah-khamenei-sends-a-letter-to-president-hassan-rouhani-about-the-jcpoa,
October 21, 2015.
[3] Twitter.com/khamenei_ir, October 21, 2015.
[4] Facebook.com/www.Khamenei.ir/posts/943612332378368:0, posted October 21,
2015.
© 1998-2015, The Middle East Media Research Institute All Rights Reserved.
Materials may only be cited with proper attribution.
Written by, To The Point News
LBJ:
- We were attacked (in the Gulf of Tonkin )
Nixon:
- I am not a crook
GHW Bush:
- Read my lips - No New Taxes
Clinton:
- I did not have sex with that woman... Miss Lewinski
GW Bush:
- Iraq has weapons of mass destruction
Obama:
- I will have the most transparent administration in history.
- The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.
- I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.
- The IRS is not targeting anyone.
- It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.
- I will put an end to the type of politics that "breeds division, conflict and cynicism".
- You didn't build that!
- I will restore trust in Government.
- The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.
- The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk
- It's not my red line - it is the world's red line.
- Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.
- We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.
- I am not spying on American citizens.
- Obama Care will be good for America ..
- You can keep your family doctor.
- Premiums will be lowered by $2500.
- If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan.
- It's just like shopping at Amazon.
- I knew nothing about "Fast and Furious" gunrunning to Mexican drug cartels.
- I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups.
- I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi .
- I have never known my uncle from Kenya who is in the country illegally and that was arrested and told to leave the country over 20 years ago.
- And, I have never lived with that uncle. He finally admitted (12-05-2013) that he DID know his uncle and that he DID live with him.
- ISIL (ISIS) is nothing but a j.v team.
- If elected I promise not to renew the Patriot Act.
- If elected I will end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan within the 1st 9 months of my term.
- I will close Guantanamo within the first 6 months of my term.
- I will bridge the gap between black and white and between America and other countries.
- No troops on the ground in Iraq. Therefore troops killed are not engaged in combat
And the biggest one of all:
- "I, Barrack Hussein Obama, pledge to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America ."
I believe we have a winner
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)MEMRI October 22, 2015 Inquiry & Analysis Series Report No.1196
Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei's Letter Of Guidelines To President RohaniOn JCPOA Sets Nine Conditions Nullifying Original Agreement Announced July
14, 2015
By: Y. Carmon and A. Savyon*
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/8813.htm
On October 21, 2015, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei published a letter
of guidelines to Iranian President Hassan Rohani on the execution of the
Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The letter's publication
coincides with the days of the Ashura that are of vital religious and
national significance in Iran and symbolize steadfastness against the forces
of evil. Intended as an historical document aimed at assuring Iran's future,
the letter was posted on Khamenei's website in Persian and tweeted from his
Twitter account and posted on his Facebook page in English (see Appendices),
and published in English by the official Islamic Republic of Iran
Broadcasting authority IRIB (see below). The letter is now a founding
document in all things concerning the JCPOA and the conditions under which
Iran will be willing to execute it.
The letter, defined by Khamenei on his website as "conditional approval" of
the JCPOA, sets several new conditions for Iran's execution of the
agreement. These conditions constitute late and unilateral additions to the
agreement concluded three months previously that fundamentally change it.
Khamenei stresses that the agreement awaits his opinion following what he
calls "precise and responsible examination" in the Majlis and "clearance of
this agreement through legal channels" in Iran's Supreme National Security
Council.
It should be further noted that in his introduction to the new conditions,
Khamenei attacks the U.S. and President Obama with great hostility, and
calls for Obama to be prosecuted by international judiciary institutions. He
states that Obama had sent him two letters declaring that he has no
intention of subverting the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran, but adds
that the U.S.'s support for fitna in Iran (i.e. the popular post-election
unrest in 2009), its monetary aid to opponents of the Republic, and its
explicit threats to attack Iran have proven the opposite and have exposed
the real intent of America's leaders, whose enmity towards Iran will not
end. He wrote that the Americans' behavior in the nuclear talks is another
link in the chain of its enmity towards Iran, that America entered into the
talks with the aim of "deception," and that therefore Iran must remain alert
in light of America's hostile intentions.
The set of conditions laid out by Khamenei creates a situation in which not
only does the Iranian side refrain from approving the JCPOA,[1] but, with
nearly every point, creates a separate obstacle, such that executing the
agreement is not possible.
The following are Khamenei's nine conditions, and their implications:
Khamenei's Conditions For Iranian Execution Of The JCPOA
First condition: Khamenei demands that the U.S. and Europe lift the
sanctions, not suspend them, and in addition demands "solid and sufficient"
guarantees in advance that this will be done, before Iran takes its own
steps and meets its own obligations under the agreement. These guarantees,
insists Khamenei, must include, inter alia, an official letter from the U.S.
president and from the EU undertaking to fully lift the sanctions.
Furthermore, he demands that this letter will state that any declaration by
the West that the "structure of the sanctions will remain in force" (i.e.
allowing snapback) will be considered "non-compliance with the JCPOA" on the
part of the West.
Implications: These conditions constitute a total change of the JCPOA.
Khamenei is not allowing any execution of the JCPOA by Iran until this is
accepted in writing by the other side, and thus he is nullifying the JCPOA
as agreed upon on July 14, 2015.
Second condition: Any sanctions against Iran "at every level and on every
pretext," including terrorism and human rights violations, by any one of the
countries participating in the negotiations will "constitute a violation of
the JCPOA," and a reason for Iran to stop executing the agreement.
Implications: This demand, that links the JCPOA to other issues and
prohibits any punishment of Iran on any issue and for any reason, serves as
an excuse for Iran to cancel the agreement.
Third condition: Under the JCPOA, Iran is obligated, following the JCPOA's
Adoption Day, to carry out its obligations concerning changing the function
of the nuclear reactor at Arak and shipping out most of its stockpile of
enriched uranium. Contrary to this, Khamenei is changing the timetable of
the JCPOA, stating that Iran will not carry out these actions until after
the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declares that it is closing
its dossier on Iran's "past and future issues (including the so-called
Possible Military Dimensions or PMD of Iran's nuclear program)."
Implications: This demand to change the timetable creates a situation in
which Iran will not take action as stipulated in the JCPOA, and will not
meet its obligations, before the sanctions are eased, also according to the
JCPOA, but instead dictates that the sanctions must first be lifted
completely and states that only then will Iran meet its obligations.
Khamenei here is creating a situation in which the IAEA will not be able to
report on Iran's meeting of its obligations regarding the Arak reactor and
regarding the shipping out of its enriched uranium by the target date of
December 15, 2015, because Iran is not going to do so by then – thus the
execution of the agreement is thwarted from the beginning.
Fourth condition: Iran will meet its obligations to "renovate" and change
the purpose of the Arak reactor only after there is a signed agreement on an
"alternative plan" for changes to the reactor, and after there is
"sufficient guarantee" that this alternative plan will be implemented.
Implications: Iran's fulfillment of its obligations regarding the Arak
reactor, as stipulated by the JCPOA, will be postponed until some unknown
future date.
Fifth condition: Iran will carry out its obligation to ship out its enriched
uranium to another country in exchange for yellowcake "on a gradual basis
and on numerous occasions," and only after "a secure agreement has been
clinched to that effect, along with sufficient guarantees" that this
exchange will be implemented.
Implications: The date for Iran to ship out its enriched uranium as
stipulated by the JCPOA is postponed until some unknown future date.
Khamenei is demanding that Iran receive in exchange for the enriched uranium
not raw uranium as per the JCPOA, but instead uranium that has been
enriched, albeit to a lower level than the uranium it ships out. This is yet
another change to the JCPOA as concluded on July 14, 2015.
Sixth condition: Khamenei instructs President Rohani to begin, along with
reducing Iran's ability to enrich uranium under the JCPOA, immediately to
expand Iran's ability to enrich uranium with a 15-year long-term plan for
190,000 centrifuge SWU (Separative Work Units). "This plan," he says, "must
allay any concern stemming from some points entailed in the JCPOA
appendices."
Implications: This article nullifies the declared goal of the JCPOA, which
is to reduce Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities.
Seventh condition: The Iranian Atomic Energy Organization must ensure
continued nuclear research and development, in its various dimensions, such
that in eight years' time, Iran will not be lacking in enrichment
technology. This, he says, is all in accordance with the JCPOA.
Eighth condition: In the event of doubt or ambiguity regarding the content
of the JCPOA, the source of authority for removing this doubt or ambiguity
will be the content of the talks – i.e. it will also include the statements
by the Iranian side, not just the "interpretation provided by the opposite
party," that is, the P5+1.
Implications: Any doubt or ambiguity regarding the content of the JCPOA will
become the source of unending dispute and will paralyze any possibility of
executing the agreement.
Ninth condition: Due to apprehensions that the other side, particularly the
U.S., will break its promises or cheat, President Rohani must establish a
"well-informed and smart panel" to monitor the execution of the agreement.
Implications: Khamenei is creating an administrative framework for perpetual
delays in the execution of the agreement.
Khamenei adds also a 10th condition, directed at Iran, not the P5+1,
demanding that Rohani take seriously his instructions in the matter of the
"resistance economy," the main thrust of which is self-reliance instead of
basing Iran's economy on external sources. He also demands that after the
sanctions are lifted, there will be no "unbridled imports," and no imports
whatsoever from the U.S.
Political Ramifications In Iran
In February 2016, elections for the Majlis and the Assembly of Experts are
set to take place in Iran. The pragmatic camp, headed by Hashemi Rafsanjani
and President Rohani, had hoped that a quick execution of the agreement
would allow the sanctions to be eased and funds to be released immediately,
which in turn would allow the pragmatic camp to present these achievements
and triumph in the elections. By setting these conditions, however, Khamenei
has thwarted any speedy execution of the agreement, and thus has thwarted
the pragmatic camp's hope for electoral success.
IRIB Translation
The following is the official English translation of Khamenei's letter, as
published by IRIB.[2] This translation was tweeted by Khamenei and also
posted on his Facebook page (see Appendix I and II).
"Wednesday, 21 October 2015 17:41
"Ayatollah Khamenei sends a letter to President Hassan Rouhani about the
JCPOA
"Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, in a
letter to President Hassan Rouhani, who also heads the Supreme National
Security Council (SNSC), referred to the precise and responsible examination
of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in the Islamic
Consultative Assembly (parliament) and also the SNSC, and the clearance of
this agreement through legal channels, and issued important instructions
regarding the observation of and safeguarding the country’s national
interests. Enumerating nine-point requirements for the implementation of the
JCPOA, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei endorsed SNSC Resolution 634, dated August 10,
2015, provided that the following provisions and requirements are observed.
"The full text of Ayatollah Khamenei’s letter follows on:
"In the Name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful
"Your Excellency, Mr Rouhani,
"President of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Head of the Supreme National
Security Council
"May God bestow success upon you.
"Greetings to You
"The agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has
already been cleared through legal channels following precise and
responsible examinations in the Islamic Consultative Assembly,
[parliamentary] ad hoc committees and other committees as well as the
Supreme National Security Council. Since the agreement is waiting for my
view, I deem it necessary to remind several points so that Your Excellency
and other officials directly or indirectly involved in the issue would have
enough time to comply with and safeguard national interests and the country’s
best interests.
"1. Before anything else, I deem it necessary to extend my gratitude to all
those involved in this challenging procedure throughout all its periods,
including the recent nuclear negotiating team whose members tried their best
in explaining the positive points and incorporating all those points [into
the agreement], critics who reminded all of us of weak points through their
appreciable meticulousness, and particularly the chairman and members of the
Majlis ad hoc committee [set up to review the JCPOA] as well as the senior
members of the SNSC who covered some voids by including their important
considerations, and finally the Speaker of Majlis and Members of Parliament
who adopted a cautious bill to show the right way of implementation [of the
agreement] to the administration, and also national media and the country’s
journalists who despite all their differences of view presented a complete
image of this agreement to public opinion. This voluminous collection of
activity and endeavors and thoughts [spent] on an issue which is thought to
be among the unforgettable and instructive issues of the Islamic Republic,
deserves appreciation and is a source of satisfaction. Therefore, one can
say with certainty that the divine reward for these responsible
contributions will, God willing, include assistance and mercy and guidance
by Almighty God because the divine promises of assistance in exchange for
assisting His religion are unbreakable.
"2. Enjoying decades-long background of presence in the very details of the
affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran, you must have naturally realized
that the government of the United States of America, neither in the nuclear
issue nor in any other issue, had been pursuing no other approach but
hostility and disturbance, and is unlikely to do otherwise in the future
either. The remarks by the US President [Barack Obama] in two letters
addressed to me on the point that [Washington] has no intention of
subverting the Islamic Republic of Iran turned out to be unreal and his open
threats of military and even nuclear strike, which can result in a lengthy
indictment against him in international courts, laid bare the real
intentions of US leaders. Political pundits and public opinion of many
nations clearly understand that the case of his never-ending hostility is
the nature and identity of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is born out
of the Islamic Revolution. Insistence on rightful Islamic stances and
opposition to the hegemonic and arrogant system, perseverance against
excessive demands and encroachment upon oppressed nations, revelations on
the US support for medieval dictators and suppression of independent
nations, incessant defense for the Palestinian nation and patriotic
resistance groups, rational and globally popular yelling at the usurping
Zionist regime constitute the main items which make the US regime’s enmity
against the Islamic Republic inevitable, and this enmity will continue as
long as the Islamic Republic [continues to] disappoint them with its
internal and sustainable strength.
"The behavior and words of the US government in the nuclear issue and its
prolonged and boring negotiations showed that this (nuclear issue) was also
another link in their chain of hostile enmity with the Islamic Republic.
Their deception through flip-flopping between their initial remarks that
came after Iran accepted to hold direct talks with them and their constant
non-compliance with their pledges throughout two-year-long negotiations and
their alignment with the demands of the Zionist regime and their bullying
diplomacy regarding relations with European governments and bodies involved
in the negotiations are all indicative of the fact that the US’s deceitful
involvement in the nuclear negotiations has been done not with the intention
of a fair settlement [of the case], but with the ill intention of pushing
ahead with its hostile objectives about the Islamic Republic.
"Doubtlessly, vigilance vis-à-vis the hostile intentions of the US
government and instances of resistance on the part of the officials of the
Islamic Republic of Iran throughout the negotiations managed, in numerous
cases, to prevent heavy damage from being inflicted [upon Iran].
"However, the outcome of the negotiations, which is enshrined in the JCPOA,
has numerous ambiguities and structural weaknesses that could inflict big
damage on the present and the future of the country in the absence of
meticulous and constant monitoring.
"3. The nine-point provisions entailed in the recent bill adopted by the
Majlis and the 10-point instructions outlined in the resolution of the
Supreme National Security Council carry helpful and effective points which
must be taken into consideration. Meantime, there are some other necessary
points which are announced here while some of the points mentioned in the
two documents are highlighted.
"First, since Iran has accepted to negotiate basically for the objective of
removal of unjust economic and financial sanctions and its enforcement (the
lifting of sanctions) is tied to Iran’s future actions under the JCPOA, it
is necessary that solid and sufficient guarantees be arranged to avoid any
infraction by the opposite parties. Written declaration by the US president
and the European Union for the lifting of the sanctions is among them. In
the statements of the EU and the US president, it must be reiterated that
these sanctions will be fully lifted. Any declaration that the structure of
the sanctions will remain in force shall imply non-compliance with the
JCPOA.
"Second, throughout the eight-year period, any imposition of sanctions at
any level and under any pretext (including repetitive and fabricated
pretexts of terrorism and human rights) on the part of any of the countries
involved in the negotiations will constitute a violation of the JCPOA and
the [Iranian] government would be obligated to take the necessary action as
per Clause 3 of the Majlis bill and stop its activities committed under the
JCPOA .
"Third, the measures related to what is mentioned in the next two clauses
will start only after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
announces [the conclusion of] the past and future issues (including the
so-called Possible Military Dimensions or PMD of Iran’s nuclear program).
"Fourth, measures to renovate the Arak plant by preserving its heavy [water]
nature will start only after a firm and secure agreement has been signed on
an alternative plan, along with sufficient guarantees for its
implementation.
"Fifth, the deal with a foreign government for swapping enriched uranium
with yellow cake will start only after a secure agreement has been clinched
to that effect, along with sufficient guarantees [for its implementation].
The aforesaid deal and exchange must be done on a gradual basis and on
numerous occasions.
"Sixth, by virtue of the Majlis bill, the plan and the necessary
preparations for mid-term development of the atomic energy industry, which
includes the method of advancement in different periods of time for 15 years
for the final objective of 190,000 SWU, must be drawn up and carefully
reviewed by the Supreme National Security Council. This plan must allay any
concern stemming from some points entailed in the JCPOA appendices.
"Seventh, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran must organize research and
development in different aspects such that after the end of the eight-year
period, there would be no shortage of technology for the level of [uranium]
enrichment entailed in the JCPOA.
"Eighth, it must be noted that on the ambiguous points in the JCPOA
document, the interpretation provided by the opposite party is not
acceptable and the reference would be the text of the negotiations.
"Ninth, the existence of complications and ambiguities in the text of the
JCPOA and the suspicion of breach of promise, infractions and deception by
the opposite party, particularly the US, require that a well-informed and
smart panel be established to monitor the progress of affairs and [gauge]
the opposite party’s commitment and realization of what was mentioned above.
The composition and the tasks of this would-be panel should be determined
and approved by the Supreme National Security Council.
"In witness whereof, Resolution 634, dated August 10, 2015, of the Supreme
National Security Council, is endorsed pending the observation of the
aforementioned points.
"In conclusion, as it has been notified in numerous meetings to you and
other government officials and also to our dear people in public gatherings,
although the lifting of sanctions is a necessary job in order to remove
injustice [imposed on people] and regain the rights of the Iranian nation,
economic overture and better livelihood and surmounting the current
challenges will not be easy unless the Economy of Resistance is taken
seriously and followed up on entirely. It is hoped that this objective will
be pursued with full seriousness and special attention would be paid to
enhancing national production. You should also watch out so that unbridled
imports would not follow the lifting of sanctions, and particularly
importing any consumer materials from the US must be seriously avoided.
"I pray to Almighty God for your and other contributors’ success.
"Source: www. leader. ir"
*Y. Carmon is President of MEMRI; A. Savyon is Director of the MEMRI Iran
Project.
Appendix I: Khamenei's Letter On Twitter[3]
Appendix II: Khamenei's Letter On Facebook[4]
Endnotes:
[1] See: MEMRI TV Clip No. 5114, Iranian Guardian Council Secretary-General
Ahmad Jannati: Khamenei Has Not Approved or Signed the JCPOA, October 16,
2015; MEMRI TV Clip No. 5117, Iranian Guardian Council Spokesman Nejatollah
Ebrahimian: The JCPOA Was Not Approved by the Majlis or the Guardian
Council, October 18, 2015; MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No.1192, The Iranian
Majlis Has Not Approved The JCPOA But Iran's Amended Version Of It, October
13, 2015; MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 6191, Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei,
Iranian Officials Speak Out Against Iranian Approval Of JCPOA October 18,
2015.
[2]
English.irib.ir/news/leader/item/217470-ayatollah-khamenei-sends-a-letter-to-president-hassan-rouhani-about-the-jcpoa,
October 21, 2015.
[3] Twitter.com/khamenei_ir, October 21, 2015.
[4] Facebook.com/www.Khamenei.ir/posts/943612332378368:0, posted October 21,
2015.
© 1998-2015, The Middle East Media Research Institute All Rights Reserved.
Materials may only be cited with proper attribution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
House Freedom Caucus Members Explain Why Most in Group Are Now Backing Paul Ryan
Conservatives of the House Freedom Caucus have cleared the way for Rep. Paul Ryan to become speaker—if he wants it.
A supermajority of the roughly 40-member Freedom Caucus pledged in an internal vote that they will support Ryan if he were to run for speaker of the House.
But by Freedom Caucus rules, this level of support fell short of the fourth-fifths majority required for a full-fledged endorsement.
“We are supporting him with a supermajority vote but we are not endorsing him,” Rep. John Fleming, a Freedom Caucus founder, told The Daily Signal.
“It basically means that those who voted to support him will continue to vote for him, and those who didn’t I’m sure will not. I think he has the votes to become speaker; the question is does he have the votes that suit him. He says he wants the endorsement. He fell short of that, but he does have overwhelming support. It’s up to him what that means beyond that.”
In announcing his conditions to run for speaker on Tuesday, Ryan said he would require the endorsement of the three House Republican groups, including the Freedom Caucus. The other two, the moderate Tuesday Group and conservative Republican Study Committee, are expected to easily endorse Ryan.
While Ryan did not get an official Freedom Caucus endorsement, the level of support he got from its members ensures he has more than enough votes to secure the 218 needed to become speaker of the House. Now it’s up to Ryan if this is the sweeping support he was looking for.
In a statement late Wednesday, Ryan sounded like a man ready to run for speaker, expressing appreciation for the Freedom Caucus’ support.
Fleming and other Freedom Caucus members indicated that they were satisfied with Ryan’s level of commitment to “process reforms” they seek in how the House does business.
“Paul is a policy entrepreneur who has developed conservative reforms dealing with a wide variety of subjects, and he has promised to be an ideas-focused speaker who will advance limited government principles and devolve power to the membership,” the Freedom Caucus said in an official statement. “While no consensus exists among members of the House Freedom Caucus regarding chairman Ryan’s preconditions for serving, we believe that these issues can be resolved within our conference in due time.”
The Freedom Caucus met with Ryan Wednesday afternoon, where they walked away satisfied with his agenda, even though he did not commit to specific rule changes.
Ryan has vowed to return to “regular order,” a process by which bills go through committee first, and votes occur separately on the 12 appropriations bills instead. Regular order also entails an open amendment process.
“He agreed a lot of the changes needed to be made,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., of the Freedom Caucus told The Daily Signal.
“What I was specifically listening for is if he would support a bottom-up approach. I don’t want him to say, ‘I agree with you, I will make these exact changes.’ Because then that would be allowing what we are against to benefit ourselves. What he did say is, ‘I agree we need to come together as Congress to make change,’ and that’s what I was looking for.”
Even with the support from the Freedom Caucus, outstanding issues remain.
Most importantly, Ryan has indicated he wants to change the process of how House lawmakers could use a tool to remove a speaker if they are upset with his performance.
Conservatives insist the tool—called a “motion to vacate” the chair—can provide accountability to the job of House speaker.
In July, Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., a Freedom Caucus founder, presented a motion to vacate the chair against Speaker John Boehner, though the House never voted on the measure.
As the rule stands now, only a majority vote is required for the resolution to succeed.
Ryan, according to Freedom Caucus lawmakers, has indicated he wants to raise the voting threshold on vacating the chair—not necessarily eliminate it.
It’s still unclear if conservatives would support that effort.
“He clarified today that it’s his intention to modify it, where the minority cannot use that against the majority,” Loudermilk said. “There’s some validity in that.”
Supporters of Ryan reacted positively to the Freedom Caucus’ vote.
“I think that’s a very good sign and I hope it’s good enough for Paul Ryan,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who dropped out of the speaker race to support Ryan.
Chaffetz, R-Utah, in an interview with The Daily Signal, continued:
“He is the right guy at the right time. To get that high of a percentage from [the Freedom Caucus], you’re probably not going to get much better than that.”
One member of the Freedom Caucus even went outside the bounds of the group to personally endorse Ryan.
“I know I will not always agree with decisions made by leadership,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., said in a statement. “However, on the major issues of the day, there is no doubt that Paul Ryan is the person best positioned to lead our party and refocus our conference on the spending issues I came here to tackle.”
Boehner, the outgoing speaker, announced Wednesday that Republicans will vote internally to nominate a speaker next Wednesday, Oct. 28, with a floor vote to follow Thursday, Oct. 29.
If Ryan officially gets in the race, he will run against Rep. Daniel Webster, R-Fla., who—even after the Freedom Caucus’ vote—has vowed to continue his quest to become speaker.
Ultimately, for a group who has pledged to support a process over a person, many Freedom Caucus members say finding the next speaker is bigger than them, even if Ryan is the one.
“I have every conviction that in his heart and soul he [Ryan] has a commitment to pass the republic along to coming generations so they might also walk in the light of freedom as we have,” Rep. Trent Franks, a Freedom Caucus member from Arizona, told The Daily Signal.
“The objective of the Freedom Caucus is to do what is truly right for America,” Franks added. “With that in mind, it’s important to have the ability to articulate a clear vision that resonates in the hearts of Americans. Paul has the acumen to do that.”
Philip Wegmann contributed to this story.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment