Look What Happens When You Close A ‘Good Nuclear Deal’ With A Rogue State

More than 20 years ago, on October 21, 1994, President Bill Clinton announced that the United States had reached a Framework Agreement with North Korea on its nuclear program. Clinton assured the American public that it was a “good deal.”

You can watch Clinton’s statement here:

“This agreement is good for the United States, good for our allies, and good for the safety of the entire world. It reduces the danger of the threat of nuclear spreading in the region. It’s a crucial step toward drawing North Korea into the global community,” Clinton said.

Sound familiar? Obama used similar language when he announced the Framework Agreement with Iran earlier this month.

We all know what happened with Clinton’s “good” deal. On April 23-25, 2003, during trilateral talks in Beijing, North Korea told the U.S. delegation that it possessed nuclear weapons. This constituted the first time that Pyongyang made such an admission. More than two years later, on October 9, 2006, North Korea conducted an underground nuclear test near the village of P’unggye.

Last night, news broke that Chinese nuclear experts have informed their American counterparts they have increased their estimates of North Korea’s nuclear weapons production well beyond most previous U.S. figures. They now suggest Pyongyang can make enough warheads to threaten regional security for the U.S. and its allies.

Wall Street Journal reporters Jeremy Page and Jay Solomon reported that China had informed U.S. nuclear specialists that North Korea will have 40 nuclear warheads by the end of 2016 and potentially over 75 by the end of the decade. North Korean engineers have apparently miniaturized them and can mount them on their KN-08 long-range missiles, which can reach California.

The news has alarmed U.S. lawmakers, who say that it must have implications for the current talks with Iran about its nuclear program. Republican lawmakers said the pending deal with Iran could mirror the 1994 nuclear agreement with North Korea.

“We saw how North Korea was able to game this whole process,” Ed Royce, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in an interview. “I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran had its hands on the same playbook.”

In fact, it goes further than Iran having its hands on the same playbook.

In every meaningful sense, the North Korean nuclear program is an Iranian nuclear program, albeit beyond Iran’s territorial borders. The Iranians pay for the program. The Iranians receive knowledge and technology from the program. The Iranians are on hand to observe every major nuclear and missile test.

But there is more.

Take, for example, the parallels between the deal with North Korea and the current negotiations with Iran. The Agreed Framework with North Korea was negotiated by Wendy Sherman, and the Iran deal is being negotiated by the same Wendy Sherman. The Agreed Framework lasted a decade, and the Iran deal is slated to last a decade. The agreement with North Korea relied on IAEA verification, and the Iran deal relies on IAEA verification.

But now, the North Koreans have a full-blown nuclear arsenal that the Americans didn’t even know about. U.S. officials reportedly expressed surprise when they were briefed on the Chinese information.

Defiant Iranian Statements

Meanwhile, Iran continues to issue defiant statements about the Framework Agreement with the six world powers and the current negotiations about a final agreement.

A top Iranian commander said Iran will never permit inspection of its military sites.

“Not only will we not grant foreigners the permission to inspect our military sites, we will not even give them permission to think about such a subject,” the Fars News Agency quoted Brigadier General Hossein Salami, the second-in-command of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), as saying on a live television broadcast last Saturday.

“They will not even be permitted to inspect the most normal military site in their dreams,” he added.

He also said that a harsh response awaits anyone who talks about such inspections.

“Visiting a military base by a foreign inspector would mean the occupation of our land because all our defense secrets are there. Even talking about the subject means national humiliation,” he added.

Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, said that U.S. officials should “stop their silly demands from Iran.”

Fars News reported that Khamenei blasted the US and Europeans and their “puppet regimes’” media hype and allegations that Iran had sought to acquire nuclear weapons, and said: “Today, the most vital threat posed to the world and the region is the US and the Zionist regime which meddle (with other nations’ affairs) and kill people anywhere they deem to be necessary without any control or commitment to conscience or religious principles.”

Ali Akbar Velayati, Khamenei’s top adviser for international affairs, demanded again that sanctions imposed on Iran should be immediately lifted when an agreement is signed, not when Iran’s compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) demands is certified.

The IAEA reported earlier that no significant progress had been made in the talks with Iran about access for inspectors to military sites.

During a military parade on Army Day in Iran last Saturday, a truck carrying a massive banner reading “Death to Israel.” was seen. A televised broadcast of the parade was punctuated by repeated cries of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.”

Warnings to Obama

Dr. Mahmoud Moradkhani, an Iranian expat and a nephew of Ayatollah Khamenei, wrote an open letter to President Obama in which he warned not to trust the Iranian regime. He told Obama that Khamenei is lying in negotiations, practicing the Shia doctrine of taqiyya in which it is permissible for Muslims to lie to the infidel for the advancement of Islam, and asked the President not to pursue his nuclear deal with the regime but to focus on Iran’s expansion policies and abysmal human rights record. Moradkhani is the son of Sheikh Ali Teherani, who married Khamenei’s sister.

Former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker joined George Schultz and Henry Kissinger in demanding a much better deal with Iran. In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, he wrote that the current Framework Agreement “needs lots of work.”

“Our P5+1 partners should understand that if we can’t trust Iran to stick to its promises during negotiations, we cannot trust that it won’t resume its nuclear-weapons program after a final deal is reached.

“Only after we have the necessary support from the P5+1 should we resume our discussions with Iran. And then, only after the Iranians have been told in no uncertain terms that we have reasonable specific demands they must meet. Let Iran and the world know what those demands are. If Iran balks at such an arrangement, then it will be that country’s fault that the talks broke down,” Baker wrote.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

BOMBSHELL: Watch Krauthammer Unload On Hillary As ‘Clinton Cash’ Scandal Goes Radioactive

As one considers the near-constant wave upon wave of disclosures and revelations about Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state and the allegedly related oceans of cash that flowed into the Clinton Foundation coffers, one can’t help but wonder if Sen. Elizabeth Warren is already preparing her explanation as to why she’s entering the presidential race.

Yes, the Massachusetts Democrat has said time and again that she won’t run for president in 2016, but Hillary’s political ship is arguably taking on so much water that it could well be at risk of sinking, at least in the eyes of Democrat power brokers, donors and strategists whose nervousness about the mounting Clinton controversies could prompt them to change course…and candidates.

Among the latest shockwaves to batter the Clinton campaign is an explosive front-page article in The New York Times detailing how the Clinton Foundation, while Hillary was secretary of state, may have benefited from a huge deal to put a Russian company — and essentially the Putin government — in control of much of the world’s uranium supply.

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”

The Times article reveals that not long after a majority stake in that massive mining enterprise, Uranium One, was set to he acquired by the Russians, “Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

In addition, as the Times’ exhaustive investigation indicates, the Clinton Foundation took in millions of dollars in connection with the uranium deal — money that reportedly was not properly disclosed.

“Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.”

This may help explain why, as Reuters reports in an exclusive story, Hillary Clinton’s non-profit “charities” have decided to amend and refile at least five years worth of tax returns.

“The charities’ errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue, the charities confirmed to Reuters.”

Plus, as Western Journalism reported, a former Clinton Foundation employee with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood — a man who represented the Foundation’s Climate Initiative in Egypt — has been sentenced to life in prison. His offense was said to have been supporting an Islamist protest against the military-led ousting of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.

Clearly, with The New York Times featuring a detailed exposé of disturbing Clinton high-dollar dealings and potential influence peddling, liberal media are not backing away from this growing scandal surrounding the woman who wants to be president. Ron Fournier, writing in National Journal, lays out a scorching assessment of the Clintons’ political operation as it seeks to downplay and dismiss a scandal such as the one that’s building around the soon-to-be-released book, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

1. Deny: Salient questions are dodged, and evidence goes missing. The stone wall is built.
2. Deflect: Blame is shifted, usually to Republicans and the media.
3. Demean: People who question or criticize the Clintons get tarred as right-wing extremists, hacks, nuts, or sluts.

Which brings us to Charles Krauthammer’s appearance Wednesday night on Fox News’ The O’Reilly Factor in which another aspect of the deepening scandal — a deal involving General Electric — was explored. In a lively exchange with Bill O’Reilly, the Fox News contributor hammered Hillary for her “moral corruption” and took a look ahead at what might happen to Mrs. Clinton in light of the fact that, “She burned the tapes, she eliminated the emails.”

You can watch Krauthammer’s fiery segment by clicking on the video above. A Fox News special report based on the new book Clinton Cash — a program called “The Tangled Clinton Web” — will air Friday night at 10p ET on Fox News Channel.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Here’s The BOMBSHELL Book That Could Blow Hillary’s Campaign Out Of The Water

Recently declared GOP presidential candidate Rand Paul has been hinting for a while now that a new book would drop bombshell accusations on the Clinton campaign — revelations so explosive and so damaging that they could blow a huge hole in Hillary’s nascent run for the White House, if not sink it altogether. As The New York Times describes it: “The book does not hit shelves until May 5, but already the Republican Rand Paul has called its findings ‘big news’ that will ‘shock people’ and make voters ‘question’ the candidacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

The as-yet-unreleased book whose advanced word is already causing huge waves in many media circles is Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, by Peter Schweizer. You may recall that Schweizer is the best-selling author of such hard-hitting political zingers as Extortion: How Politicians Extract Your Money, Buy Votes, and Line Their Own Pockets and Throw Them All Out: How Politicians and Their Friends Get Rich off Insider Stock Tips, Land Deals, and Cronyism That Would Send the Rest of Us to Prison.

The latest Schweizer exposé, as described by the Times, details what the author characterizes as a self-serving “pay to play” racket set up by Bill and Hillary Clinton involving their foundation and her influence while secretary of state. The Times articles calls Clinton Cash “the most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle still in its infancy.” It reportedly describes the same sort of allegedly illicit activities that resulted in Democrat Sen. Robert Menedez recently being indicted for corruption in office.

A number of media outlets, including Fox News, are readying in-depth reports on Schweizer’s findings for the coming weeks. The New York Times — which has aggressively and repeatedly gone after Hillary Clinton for her questionable use of a personal, private email account to conduct official government business — is once again taking a lead position among liberal media in exposing Mrs. Clinton’s perceived political vulnerabilities.

The revelations in Clinton Cash, notes the Times article, are being downplayed by Clinton campaign operatives trying to dismiss the new 186-page investigation of donations by foreign entities to the Clinton Foundation as just another “conservative hit job.”

“The book, a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times, asserts that foreign entities who made payments to the Clinton Foundation and to Mr. Clinton through high speaking fees received favors from Mrs. Clinton’s State Department in return.”

Because Mrs. Clinton seems to be able to dodge, shed, and inoculate herself against scandals that would likely bring down many other politicians, it will certainly be interesting to see if this latest round of disclosures and the intense media attention paid to them will actually resonate with Democrat voters who tend to overlook virtually all criticism of Hillary.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Here Are The Top 5 Reasons Hillary Clinton Is Anti-Woman

 

Hillary Clinton claims to be a champion for the middle class. Laughable.

Hillary Clinton also claims to be a champion for women. Extra, double, super laughable. Why? Here are 5 reasons:

1.  Hillary intimidated and suppressed any women who came forward with accusations against her husband while he was serving as President. To quote Political Insider, “Hillary ran a ‘war room’ to crack down on so called ‘bimbo eruptions.’ This was the name given to the countless stories of infidelity and sexual assaults committed by Bill Clinton over the years.”  For some reason, I thought silencing women and being a voice for women were two different things!

TinaFeySluts

2.  She defended a child rapist, and laughed about it. Laughed. About. It. Or, in the words of the victim, Hillary Clinton took me through hell.”  Sound like a champion of women’s rights to you?

ByeBye

3.  Hillary Clinton is a strong advocate for abortion. Have you heard of gendercide?  Abortion has been consistently shown to affect girl babies at significantly higher levels than boy babies.  It’s absolutely tragic. We’re killing baby girls by the millions, and ‘pro-woman’ Hillary supports it.

NotAFeminist

4.  She doesn’t believe women can afford their own birth control. Instead, she believes the government should force employers to provide contraceptive coverage of every kind, even if it’s against their deeply-held religious beliefs. Don’t worry about freedom, sweethearts; let the taxpayer get the bill.

Menses

5.  Hillary Clinton accepted millions of dollars from countries who oppress and suppress women. Senator Rand Paul may have said it best“In countries that stone people to death for adultery and imprison people for adultery, this is the kind of thing you would think someone for women’s rights would be standing up against, instead of accepting thinly veiled bribes.” Boom goes the dynamite.

MoneyMouth

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

CNN Slams Hillary Clinton’s Failure To Connect With The Public While In Chipotle

Former Secretary of State (and now 2016 Democratic presidential candidate) Hillary Clinton seems to have struggled in launching her candidacy. Amidst the Benghazi hearings, those lost emails, and the undocumented international donations to her foundation, she is now is catching flak from both parties for going incognito at a Ohio Chipotle restaurant to avoid public scrutiny.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus believes the move was well calculated and one that is going to distance her from voters.

“This is the big thing that a lot of the mainstream media is missing,” Priebus said during a Fox News segment with Hannity. “This is not savvy. This is not something that’s interesting. This is the only strategy they could employ. The strategy is: make sure the field knows that she’s running, and then not answer any questions from the media, and not actually talk to anybody.”

On Monday, Clinton got lunch at a Chipotle in Maumee, Ohio; and the visit is hampering her efforts to make herself appear more relatable to everyday people.

“The manager of the Chipotle in Ohio had to look at the security video to prove it was Hillary Clinton who stopped in at Chipotle today,” John King said on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360. “She went to Chipotle, she got lunch apparently, and she didn’t talk to anybody.”

“Ohio’s kind of important in presidential politics,” he continued. “If Bill Clinton were on that ride, he would still be in that Chipotle and somehow would have known a third of the people.”

Hillary’s uncomfortability in public runs in stark contrast to President Obama’s trip to Chipotle last year. He was seen hanging over and selecting his food from the wrong side of the sneeze guard.

Twitter Obama Chipotle

Twitter/ John

h/t: Breitbart

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth