Wednesday, August 19, 2015

UN-Iran deal will let Tehran inspect site where it allegedly worked on nukes

You can thank Dumb Ass Obama and the Democrats for this stupid deal getting passed.

Iran, in an unusual arrangement, will be allowed to use its own experts to inspect a site it allegedly used to develop nuclear arms under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press.

The revelation is sure to roil American and Israeli critics of the main Iran deal signed by the U.S., Iran and five world powers in July. Those critics have complained that the deal is built on trust of the Iranians, a claim the U.S. has denied.
The investigation of the Parchin nuclear site by the International Atomic Energy Agency is linked to a broader probe of allegations that Iran has worked on atomic weapons. That investigation is part of the overarching nuclear deal.
The Parchin deal is a separate, side agreement worked out between the IAEA and Iran. The United States and the five other world powers that signed the Iran nuclear deal were not party to this agreement but were briefed on it by the IAEA and endorsed it as part of the larger package.
Without divulging its contents, the Obama administration has described the document as nothing more than a routine technical arrangement between Iran and the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency on the particulars of inspecting the site.
During a hearing on Capital Hill July 23, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-NJ, and Sen. James Risch, R-ID, raised the issue of how Parchin would be inspected. Kerry replied that the Parchin inspection was "a classified component" of the deal and wouldn't go into specifics.
Any IAEA member country must give the agency some insight into its nuclear program. Some countries are required to do no more than give a yearly accounting of the nuclear material they possess. But nations— like Iran — suspected of possible proliferation are under greater scrutiny that can include stringent inspections.
But the agreement diverges from normal inspection procedures between the IAEA and a member country by essentially ceding the agency's investigative authority to Iran. It allows Tehran to employ its own experts and equipment in the search for evidence for activities that it has consistently denied — trying to develop nuclear weapons.
Evidence of that concession, as outlined in the document, is sure to increase pressure from U.S. congressional opponents as they review the July 14 Iran nuclear deal and vote on a resolution of disapproval in early September. If the resolution passed and President Barack Obama vetoed it, opponents would need a two-thirds majority to override it. Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican, has suggested opponents will likely lose.
The White House has denied claims by critics that a secret "side deal" favorable to Tehran exists. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has said the Parchin document is like other routine arrangements between the agency and individual IAEA member nations, while IAEA chief Yukiya Amano told Republican senators last week that he is obligated to keep the document confidential.
But Republican critics are bound to harshly criticize any document that cedes to Iran the right to look for the very nuclear wrongdoing that it has denied committing. Olli Heinonen, who was in charge of the Iran probe as deputy IAEA director general from 2005 to 2010 ,said he can think of no instance where a country being probed was allowed to do its own investigation.
Iran has refused access to Parchin for years and has denied any interest in — or work on — nuclear weapons. Based on U.S., Israeli and other intelligence and its own research, the IAEA suspects that the Islamic Republic may have experimented with high-explosive detonators for nuclear arms at that military facility and other weapons-related work elsewhere.
The IAEA has repeatedly cited evidence, based on satellite images, of possible attempts to sanitize the site since the alleged work stopped more than a decade ago.
The document seen by the AP is a draft that one official familiar with its contents said doesn't differ substantially from the final version. He demanded anonymity because he isn't authorized to discuss the issue.
It is labeled "separate arrangement II," indicating there is another confidential agreement between Iran and the IAEA governing the agency's probe of the nuclear weapons allegations.
The document suggests that instead of carrying out their own probe, IAEA staff will be reduced to monitoring Iranian personnel as they inspect the Parchin site.
Iran will provide agency experts with photos and videos of locations the IAEA says are linked to the alleged weapons work, "taking into account military concerns."
That wording suggests that — beyond being barred from physically visiting the site — the agency won't even get photo or video information from areas Iran says are off-limits because they have military significance.
IAEA experts would normally take environmental samples for evidence of any weapons development work, but the agreement stipulates that Iranian technicians will do the sampling.
The sampling is also limited to only seven samples inside the building where the experiments allegedly took place. Additional ones will be allowed only outside of the Parchin site, in an area still to be determined.
"Activities will be carried out using Iran's authenticated equipment consistent with technical specifications provided by the agency," the agreement says. While the document says that the IAEA "will ensure the technical authenticity" of Iran's inspection, it does not say how.
The draft is unsigned but the signatory for Iran is listed as Ali Hoseini Tash, deputy secretary of the Supreme National Security Council for Strategic Affairs instead of an official of Iran's nuclear agency. That reflects the significance Tehran attaches to the agreement.
Iranian diplomats in Vienna were unavailable for comment, while IAEA spokesman Serge Gas said the agency had no immediate comment.
The main focus of the July 14 deal between Iran and six world powers is curbing Iran's present nuclear program that could be used to make weapons. But a subsidiary element obligates Tehran to cooperate with the IAEA in its probe of the allegations.
The investigation has been essentially deadlocked for years, with Tehran asserting the allegations are based on false intelligence from the U.S., Israel and other adversaries. But Iran and the U.N. agency agreed last month to wrap up the investigation by December, when the IAEA plans to issue a final assessment on the allegations.
Both Iran and the IAEA were upbeat when announcing the agreement last month. But Western diplomats from IAEA member nations who are familiar with the probe are doubtful that Tehran will diverge from claiming that all its nuclear activities are — and were — peaceful, despite what they say is evidence to the contrary.
They say the agency will be able to report in December. But that assessment is unlikely to be unequivocal because chances are slim that Iran will present all the evidence the agency wants or give it the total freedom of movement it needs to follow up the allegations.
Still, the report is expected to be approved by the IAEA's board, which includes the United States and other powerful nations that negotiated the July 14 agreement. They do not want to upend their July 14 deal, and will see the December report as closing the books on the issue.
Senate Appropriations Committee subcommittee chairman Lindsey Graham, a Republican presidential hopeful, last week asked for "any and all copies of side agreements between Iran and the IAEA associated with the Iran nuclear deal." He threatened to cut off U.S. funding for the U.N. agency otherwise.

What Cartoon


Trump, the outsider, turning to insiders for campaign help


Donald Trump has defied and mocked the Washington establishment on his ride to the top of the 2016 GOP presidential field. But his emerging domestic and foreign policies show that, behind the scenes, he is starting to rely on some established Republican voices.

On immigration, Trump, a billionaire businessman who has never held public office, turned to Alabama GOP Sen. Jeff Sessions to help draft his recently unveiled campaign platform. Sessions, one of Washington’s leading foes of illegal immigration, in turn touted Trump's proposal.
“It’s just a mainstream plan that politicians have been promising to do for 30 years,” Sessions told Fox News on Monday. “These are things that are bread-and-butter basics.”
Trump’s proclamation on day one of his campaign that he would build a wall along the country’s southern border and “have Mexico pay” was clearly directed at the party’s conservative base, and was included in the immigration platform. But his plan, and commentary on it, also had the markings of Sessions' well-honed argument that allowing illegal immigrants into the U.S. depresses wages and takes jobs from Americans -- and that granting them a path to citizenship is tantamount to amnesty.
“They have to go,” Trump proclaimed Sunday on NBC about illegal immigrants and children born to them in the United States.
That Trump and his attention-grabbing, roughly eight-week-old campaign would eventually have to focus more on policy appears inevitable. Likewise, it was only a matter of time before the Republican front-runner -- who does not keep a battalion of campaign advisers on hand -- would have to turn to some established voices for help.
But whether he continues to reach out to them, and whether that may hurt Trump among voters drawn to his renegade-style campaign, remains to be seen.
“Trump's supporters don't like him because of his consistency or his deep understanding of the issues,” Republican strategist Joe Desilets, managing partner at the D.C.-based political consulting firm 21st & Main, said.
“They like him because he is a flame-thrower who speaks his mind regardless of the consequences. With that said, I find it difficult to see Trump's supporters abandoning him over who his policy advisers are.”
Trump has indeed attacked the Washington establishment -- including so-called “career politicians” and the Republican National Committee. Most polls show him with a double-digit lead over his closest GOP rivals. He has also threatened to launch an independent bid if mistreated by Washington Republicans, which could severely hurt the party’s chances of winning the 2016 White House race.
In Washington circles, Sessions is still a standard-bearer for the immigration policy right. But he's not the only GOP voice Trump is consulting.
On foreign policy, Trump told NBC that he picks up military advice from analysts on TV including retired Army Col. Jack Jacobs and John Bolton, a former U.N. ambassador and a Fox News contributor.
Whether Trump has personally spoken to either for policy advice is unclear. Bolton does not discuss details of private policy discussions. Jacobs, who now describes himself as a journalist, did not respond to an attempt to contact him.
But Bolton has been seen talking privately with Trump and other GOP candidates including Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush on the sidelines of at least two recent gatherings -- the New Hampshire Republican Party’s “First in the Nation” Leadership Summit and the Iowa Freedom Summit.
Trump's campaign operation itself may also be evolving. For ground-game strategy, Trump has hired long-time Republican operative Chuck Lauder to run his Iowa campaign.
Lauder is well known for helping GOP presidential candidate and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum pull off a surprise win in the 2012 Iowa caucuses.
Trump’s immigration plan, meanwhile, also calls for overhauling the federal government’s H-1B work visa program to keep U.S. companies from what he calls importing “cheaper workers from overseas” to fill vacancies for skilled jobs.
It is an issue on which Sessions’ office has increasingly focused since helping defeat the Senate’s bipartisan immigration bill in 2013.
“One thing I like about (Trump’s) plan is that he emphasizes how this unlawful, huge flow of immigration is hammering poor people -- African Americans, Hispanics who are here struggling to get a higher wage,” Sessions also told Fox News on Monday.
In Trump’s policy papers released Sunday, the campaign also cited Chris Crane, president of a union that represents ICE agents and who is an outspoken critic of the Obama administration’s immigration policy -- often aligned with other Washington conservatives critical of that immigration policy.
The document quotes Crane arguing that ICE agents are being forced to apply Obama’s 2012 executive order on illegal immigrant children to adult inmates in jail including “serious criminals who have committed felonies, who have assaulted officers and who prey on children.”

Grassley questions whether Clinton attorney had clearance for thumb drives


A top Republican senator is questioning whether Hillary Clinton's personal attorney had the security clearance to keep thumb drives containing thousands of her emails, after it was revealed some of her messages contained highly sensitive -- even "top secret" -- information. 

"The transmission of classified material to an individual unauthorized to possess it is a serious national security risk," Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote in a letter to Clinton lawyer David Kendall.
The FBI recently took possession of not only Clinton's personal server but three thumb drives kept by Kendall. The State Department previously has said that Clinton's attorney was approved to handle the documents -- telling Politico, before the files were turned over, that her counsel had "clearance." Further, the Clinton campaign said at the time "the thumb drive is secure."
Grassley for weeks has questioned whether that information was in fact being properly stored, asking FBI Director James Comey in late July what steps were being taken to secure the materials and whether Kendall had the "requisite security clearance."
But he upped the pressure in his letter to Kendall. He said recent revelations -- namely, inspector general findings that at least two emails on the server were classified at the "top secret" level -- and the FBI's takeover of the devices suggest Kendall was not authorized to have them.
"In light of that particular classification, which generally requires advanced protocols ... to possess and view, it appears the FBI has determined that your clearance is not sufficient to allow you to maintain custody of the emails," Grassley told Kendall in the letter, asking him a string of questions about his clearance levels.
Fox News is told the thumb drives are not a complete back-up copy of the server's contents but, rather, a copy of the emails Clinton did not purge.
The Clinton campaign has maintained she never exchanged emails marked as classified at the time, though the emails flagged by the IG were said to be classified from the start. The State Department has so far found dozens of classified emails in the Clinton trove, and recently referred more than 300 messages to various agencies for review to see whether they, too, have classified contents.
Grassley raised several concerns in his letter, including that Kendall reportedly did not get a safe from the State Department to store the thumb drives until July of this year.  
For a period of months, Grassley wrote, "it appears that in addition to not having an adequate security clearance, you did not have the appropriate tools in place to secure the thumb drives. Even with the safe, there are questions as to whether it was an adequate mechanism to secure" the material.
He added, "it is imperative to confirm when, how, and why you, and any of your associates, received a security clearance in connection with your representation of Ms. Clinton and whether it was active while you had custody of Secretary Clinton's emails ... Moreover, if a person unauthorized to maintain custody of the classified materials does in fact maintain custody, it raises legitimate questions as to whether the information was properly secured from foreign governments and other entities."
An intelligence source told Fox News that the FBI has begun its review of the Clinton server and also "looked inside" the three thumb drives from Kendall.
As for Grassley's request to Kendall, the source said there apparently was a gap in the security clearance, saying it "stopped and started."
Kendall could not be reached for comment on the Grassley letter.

EPA hits oil and gas industry with new methane emissions regs


The Environmental Protection Agency unveiled plans Tuesday to slash methane emissions from oil and gas production almost in half, the latest in a series of administration regulations aimed at curbing global warming. 

The proposal, though, looked set to face stiff opposition from energy groups and Republicans lawmakers, who accused the administration of pandering to “the fantasies of the environmental Left.”
The target to cut methane by 40 to 45 percent by 2025 (compared against 2012 levels) was accompanied by proposed regulations cutting emissions from new natural gas wells, along with standards for drilling to reduce leakage on public lands.
The regulations would require energy producers to find and repair leaks at oil and gas wells and capture gas that escapes from wells that use fracking. The administration said the rules would apply only to emissions from new or modified natural gas wells, meaning thousands of existing wells would not have to comply.
"Today, through our cost-effective proposed standards, we are underscoring our commitment to reducing the pollution fueling climate change and protecting public health while supporting responsible energy development, transparency and accountability," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a statement.
EPA officials estimated the regulations would cost industry between $320 million and $420 million in 2025, with reduced health care costs and other benefits totaling about $460 million to $550 million.
In a conference call Tuesday, EPA Acting Assistant Administrator Janet McCabe said the new regulations would result in methane reductions of 20-30 percent by 2025. However, McCabe repeatedly refused to be specific about where the remaining reductions would come from, despite being pressed on the matter multiple times by reporters.
“What I am saying is that as we move forward, additional opportunities will be identified in order to get to the goal,” McCabe said. “It doesn’t mean we have every last one of them identified at this moment.”
Republican lawmakers and energy groups were swift in their condemnation of the new proposals, with many arguing methane emissions have been falling in recent years.
“The EPA’s plan to limit emissions flies in the face of technological reality. The truth is that while the oil and natural gas industry has greatly increased production on state and private lands, methane emissions have actually fallen,” House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop, R-Utah, said in a statement. “The Obama Administration continues to prioritize the fantasies of the environmental Left over American energy security and economic growth.”
“The oil and gas industry is leading the charge in reducing methane,” American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard said. “The last thing we need is more duplicative and costly regulation that could increase the cost of energy for Americans.”
Others expressed doubt about handing the EPA more power in the light of the recent toxic Colorado river spill, caused by EPA workers.
“If recent events are any indicator, giving more power to EPA doesn't necessarily yield positive results. Just ask the citizens who live near and depend on the Animas River,” Tom Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research, said in a statement.
The Obama administration is expected to finalize the rules next year after a public consultation period.
The latest regulations come just weeks after the Obama administration announced more regulations on carbon emissions from power plants, calling for a 32 percent emissions cut by 2030, as compared with 2005 levels. Republicans vowed to fight the changes and a number of states and power companies immediately filed legal challenges.
The administration has also proposed regulations targeting carbon pollution from planes, and has set new standards to reduce pollution from trucks and vans.
Environmentalists praised the new rules, but noted that the ambitious goals announced under the proposals would be difficult to meet without targeting existing wells.
David Doniger, climate policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council called the new regulations "a good start,” adding that the EPA “needs to follow up by setting methane leakage standards for existing oil and gas operations nationwide."

Obama administration objects as Russia moves ahead with Iran missile sale

Thank you Obama.

Despite a ban on arms shipments to Iran under international sanctions, Russia appears willing to proceed with the sale of advanced S-300 surface-to-air missiles to the country -- in a development triggering objections from the Obama administration.  

“We have long expressed our concerns over reports of the possible sale of this missile system to the Iranians,” Pentagon spokesman Capt. Jeff Davis told Fox News.
Russia, along with the U.S. and others, was a party to the recently struck Iran nuclear agreement, which keeps the arms embargo in place for five more years. A State Department official told Fox News this specific S-300 missile system is not technically prohibited under United Nations sanctions or the nuclear deal. But the department does not want the sale to proceed.
“We certainly object to it,” department spokesman John Kirby told reporters.
Reuters first reported that Iran plans to sign the contract for four of the S-300 Russian missiles as soon as next week.
"The text of the contract is ready and our friends will go to Russia next week to sign the contract," Iran Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan reportedly said.
When asked to characterize the capability of Russia’s S-300 air defense system, a U.S. defense official with knowledge of Russia’s weapons systems told Fox News, “This is a very capable weapons system that can bring down U.S. or Israeli jet aircraft.”
The Obama administration has made its objections known before. When Russia first announced its plans to proceed with the sale in April, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said, “The United States has previously made known our objections to that sale, and I understand that Secretary Kerry had an opportunity to raise these concerns once again in a recent conversation with his Russian counterpart.”
The announcement comes at a time when Russia and Iran appear to have grown their diplomatic and military ties in the weeks following the comprehensive nuclear accord struck July 14 in Vienna.
Fox News first reported a clandestine visit by Iran’s shadowy Quds Force commander Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani on July 24, just 10 days following the nuclear agreement. Senior military officers and U.S. lawmakers hold Soleimani and his proxy forces responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American soldiers in Iraq.
The Quds Force is the special operations wing of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, responsible for supporting terrorist groups and proxy forces in Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq. Like Russia, it supports the Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad. According to local reports, Russia also delivered six MiG 31 fighter jets to Syria on Sunday.
Soleimani’s visit to Russia involved meetings with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his defense minister and appears to have kicked off a series of other bilateral engagements between Iran and Russia.
Last week, Russia and Iran held joint naval exercises in the Caspian Sea, which separates the two countries.
On Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov hosted his Iranian counterpart Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, who was Iran’s point man in the nuclear negotiations.
“We are confident that the Vienna agreement will have an enormous impact on developing ties between our two countries,” Zarif said at a Moscow presser Monday, according to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
A last-minute provision added to the comprehensive nuclear agreement in Vienna prohibits the sale of arms for five more years with Iran.
Page 7 of the White House fact sheet explaining the comprehensive July 14 nuclear agreement between Iran and six world powers reads:
“While some of our P5 partners wanted these restrictions lifted immediately, we pushed back and were successful in keeping them for 5 and 8 more years or until the IAEA reaches its broader conclusion.”
Russia is among the “P5” partners.

CartoonsDemsRinos