‘There will be a price’: Obama team reportedly fuming over Netanyahu visit

The Obama administration reportedly is fuming over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plans to address Congress in March regarding the Iranian threat, with one unnamed official telling an Israeli newspaper he will pay “a price” for the snub.  
House Speaker John Boehner invited Netanyahu -- and the Israeli leader accepted – without any involvement from the White House.
In public, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest politely describes this as a “departure” from protocol. He also says the president will not meet with Netanyahu when he visits in early March, but has attributed that decision only to a desire not to influence Israel’s upcoming elections.
But in private, Obama’s team is livid with the Israeli leader, according to Haaretz.
"We thought we've seen everything," a source identified as a senior American official was quoted as saying. "But Bibi managed to surprise even us. There are things you simply don't do.
“He spat in our face publicly and that's no way to behave. Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price."
The anonymous quote was a throwback to when, last year, Atlantic magazine quoted another unnamed senior administration official calling Netanyahu a “chickenshit.”
Administration officials, including Earnest, did not deny the quote at the time, though the White House stressed the criticism did not reflect how the rest of the administration views Netanyahu.  
On Friday, Earnest once again was asked about tensions with the Israeli government. Asked if the decision to speak to Congress was a slap at the Obama administration, he said, “I certainly didn’t interpret it that way.”
As for the decision for Obama not to meet with his Israeli counterpart, he stood by the earlier explanation.
“This administration goes to great lengths to ensure that we don’t give even the appearance of interfering or attempting to influence the outcome” of democratic elections abroad, he said.
Meanwhile, Haaretz also reported that Obama had directly warned Netanyahu to stop urging U.S. lawmakers to back legislation teeing up new sanctions against Iran.
Obama has threatened to veto such a bill, saying it could derail delicate talks over Iran’s nuclear program – and Netanyahu’s visit to Washington could give him an opportunity to further encourage sanctions legislation.
Haaretz reported that Israel’s ambassador already has been urging members of Congress to support the measures. The newspaper reported that Obama told Netanyahu to stop during a Jan. 12 phone call.
On Friday, Earnest acknowledged that Obama and Netanyahu have a “fundamental disagreement” about the diplomatic talks with Iran.
“He doesn’t share [the administration’s] view,” he said. But Earnest also said the “differences of opinion” do not undermine America’s commitment to Israel’s security.
As Obama officials often do, he described that commitment as “unshakable.”

And They’re Off: Republicans descend on Iowa summit, with 2016 in the air

WASHINGTON –  Call it the unofficial kick-off of the 2016 Republican presidential race. 
Two-dozen Republican politicians -- nearly half of them at least considering a run for the White House -- are descending on downtown Des Moines this weekend for the Iowa Freedom Summit, where they'll test their conservative chops before a sold-out crowd. 
The summit, which was held in New Hampshire last time around, is only in its second year but is drawing an impressive amount of GOP star power. The heavy-hitting lineup, in the first-in-the-nation caucus state, effectively makes it the first major candidate forum of the cycle. 
"Odds are, the next president of the United States will be there," said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, who is sponsoring the event along with Citizens United. 
The Saturday event is being held as the field of potential 2016 candidates grows ever-larger, with 2012 nominee Mitt Romney and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush making moves toward a run. 
The two former governors will not be in Iowa, but here's who will: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum. 
Others slated to speak include neurosurgeon and conservative firebrand Ben Carson, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and businessman Donald Trump, as well as former Hewlett-Packard head Carly Fiorina and former U.N. ambassador John Bolton. 
All at least carry with them presidential speculation; most are openly flirting with a bid. 
The Iowa summit, which lasts all day Saturday, will be their biggest chance so far to test-run their messages with Iowa voters. 
For some -- particularly those with appeal to social conservatives, a powerful bloc in the Hawkeye State -- it's a chance to stand out in a crowded field. Potential candidates like Santorum, who have been out of the game since the last race, could use some heartland buzz. 
At the same time, the setting could test the reach of more moderate GOP figures. 
"A lot will depend on exactly what they will say," said Lara Brown, director of the political management program at George Washington University. "At some level, people have to decide what are the issues that bring them together, and what are the issues that will turn them off." 
But she noted, "For every Republican nominee, they have to have support from the Republican right and the evangelical community." 
Christie -- known more for his record battling the unions and his Jersey-style put-downs than his work on issues that drive caucus-goers -- is one to watch. Brown believes the New Jersey governor will spend his time hammering home the message he's pro-life. 
"He may also feel that he should address his stance on immigration and what he experienced as a governor in a state that has a lot of immigrants," she said. 
Also generating some buzz is Walker, who unlike many other potential candidates has been busy running for reelection. 
His spokesman Tom Everson said in a statement the governor is looking forward to "sharing the story of Wisconsin's successful reforms." 
Despite the big turnout, a number of major GOP players are not joining the summit. Aside from Romney and Bush, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio also aren't attending. 
"What they are likely calculating is how they would be associated with a high-profile event that could be used against them if they were in a general election," Brown said, as a possible reason for the no-shows. 
King, a staunch conservative, recently ruffled Republican feathers after he voted against re-electing Rep. John Boehner as speaker of the House. 
King's controversial comments on illegal immigrants -- he has compared them to drug mules, and most recently described an undocumented immigrant invited to sit with Michelle Obama at the State of the Union as a "deportable" -- have also alienated him from some in his party. 
"Guilt by association is a pretty effective tool," Brown said. "When you have trackers and people tweeting selfies, it makes it more difficult for politicians to talk to people, whether they agree with people or not."

Obama cancels end of India trip to fly to Saudi Arabia following king's death

President Obama has cancelled the end of his trip to India to fly to Saudi Arabia in the wake of the death of the country's king and growing instability in the region, a top Indian official told The Associated Press.
The official said Obama will fly from India Tuesday, skipping a planned trip to the Taj Mahal. The White House did not immediately confirm the report. 
Obama will reportedly arrive in New Delhi Sunday for talks with Prime Minister Nerendra Modi and to be the chief guest in India's Republic Day parade Monday. Obama had been scheduled to return to Washington late Tuesday
Obama's travel schedule was changed so that he could meet with King Salman and other Saudi officials after his speech in India Tuesday. Biden will stay in Washington.
Saudi Arabia has long been a key U.S. ally, and a bulwark against Iran’s reach. Given the line of succession – King Abdullah's half-brother Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud has replaced him – the former diplomat did not expect major policy changes in the short-term. 
Indeed, Salman said in a speech that aired on the state-run Saudi television that the country will adhere to the same policies it has followed "since its establishment."
Salman made an oblique reference to the chaos gripping the greater Middle East as the extremist Islamic State group now holds a third of both Iraq and Syria.
"The Arab and the Islamic nations are in dire need of solidarity and cohesion," the king said.
A former U.S. diplomat told Fox News that the Saudi policy on matters like Yemen has not been clear since 2009, and the diplomat even anticipated a softer stance from the Kingdom on Syria, where the late king committed Saudi airpower to fighting the Islamic State.
Abdullah's death may also open up a bigger power vacuum in Riyadh than first believed. The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. officials do not consider the 79-year-old Salman to be a strong or healthy ruler in his own right, which raises the possibility that others in the royal family could come to the forefront.
Most immediately, the Obama administration faces a critical challenge in Yemen, where President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi,a U.S. ally, resigned Thursday after being held captive by Houthi rebels.
The White House had originally said Vice President Biden would lead a delegation to Saudi Arabia. However, it was reportedly determined that the window when Biden would be on the ground in Riyadh coincided with Obama's departure from India. 
Obama, in the meantime, will be the first U.S. president to visit India twice while in office; he also traveled there in 2010 for an economic summit.
The president's visit is expected to be heavy on symbolism and lighter on substantive advances, though climate change, economics and defense ties are all on the agenda. Indian political commentator Ashok Malik said expectations for concrete deliverables during the visit are "below the standards usually set by U.S. presidents when they travel across the world for a three-day visit."
Still, U.S. and Indian officials appear to agree that even a symbolic show of solidarity between the leaders would be a sign of progress after recent difficulties.
While military cooperation and U.S. defense sales have grown, Washington has been frustrated by India's failure to open up to more foreign investment and to address complaints alleging intellectual property violations. India's liability legislation has also prevented U.S. companies from capitalizing on a landmark civil nuclear agreement between the two countries in 2008.
U.S. officials hope the improving relationship between Obama and Modi will payoff in the policy arena. The White House plans to push India on climate change.

Ask Me Cartoon

UNICEF tech chief quits after Fox News inquiry

EXCLUSIVE: The newly appointed chief information officer of UNICEF has abruptly resigned from the job he officially took up at the beginning of January. His departure came days after Fox News raised questions about the selection process that had gotten him the post.
The UNICEF CIO, Paul van Essche resigned “for personal reasons,” a spokesman for the United Nations Children’s Fund told Fox News. “We wish him well in his future career.”
The quick exit is Van Essche’s second departure from a top U.N. info-tech post.
In August, 2011, he ended a three-year term as project director of a still unfinished computerized U.N. financial management system known as Umoja (Swahili for Unity), amid a growing chorus of criticism about the project’s extensive—and expensive-- difficulties and delays in execution.
Months after his departure from the Umoja position, the system that was touted as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to transform the U.N. was judged to be least $100 million over budget at $315 million, and two years behind its planned 2013 completion date, with the delay described as a “failure in management of the project” under the aegis of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.
At the time, the U.N.’s chief financial oversight advisory committee declared that it was “deeply disturbed and dismayed by the apparent lack of awareness and foreknowledge in the Organization as to the actual status of the project, which, in its view, points to the inadequacy of the project governance, oversight and reporting arrangements.”
Most of Umoja’s many problems, the advisory committee declared, “could have been foreseen and avoided through proper project planning and prompt management action.”
Umoja is still incomplete. Its long-overdue starting date has been turned into a phased series of unveilings now scheduled to take place from 2016 to 2018. Its current cost is estimated to be $378, million—up from its most recent budget of $348 million, and last fall it was considered likely to run up a further tab that auditors declared was “still unknown.”
The UNICEF job that van Essche briefly held was advertised last June., and the fact that he had taken the job was announced on the website of his personal consultancy, Paul van Essche and Associates, in December. 
According to a UNICEF spokesperson, he was chosen for the position “through UNICEF’s standard, competitive procedures for recruitment of senior officials.” 
The selection process “included a competitive application, assessment by a panel and recommendation to the executive head” of UNICEF, Anthony Lake. The spokesperson did not reveal how many other candidates were considered in the final selection for the job.
Among the responsibilities van Essche was hired to fulfill was to “provide strategic leadership and overall direction to all Information and Communication Technology (ICT) activities in support of UNICEF’s programs, and “drive the continual transformation of the ICT function” at the organization.
According to the UNICEF spokesperson, “a senior UNICEF colleague has temporarily assumed the interim Director role until the position is filled.”
Fox News attempts to reach van Essche through his corporate website and colleagues in his consultancy were unavailing.
George Russell is editor-at-large of Fox News and can be found on Twitter: @GeorgeRussell or on Facebook.com/George Russell

House passes abortion bill after earlier stumble

As thousands of abortion foes surged through the city on their annual protest march to the Supreme Court, Republicans muscled legislation through the House on Thursday tightening federal restrictions on abortions. The vote came after internal divisions forced them into an embarrassing fumble of a similar bill.
Even as a White House veto threat all but ensured the bill would never become law, the House voted by a near party-line 242-179 to permanently bar federal funds for any abortion coverage. The measure would also block tax credits for many people and businesses buying abortion coverage under President Barack Obama's health care law.
GOP leaders pushed the measure to the House floor hours after abruptly abandoning another bill banning most late-term abortions because a rebellion led by female Republican lawmakers left them short of votes.
While that stumble underscored the challenges GOP leaders face in controlling their newly enlarged House majority, they were eager to act the same day that March for Life protesters streamed through town to protest the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion.
"I urge my colleagues to stand with the hundreds of thousands of people out on the Mall right now by voting for this bill," said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. "Stand up and commit to creating an America that values every life."
Democrats accused the GOP of an assault on women's freedom and painted Republicans as trying to placate the marchers not far from the Capitol.
"They certainly wanted to appeal, I would say pander, to that group," said Rep. Janice Schakowsky, D-Ill.
"Women's rights should not be theater, should not be drama," said Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn.
The approved bill would permanently ban the use of federal money for nearly all abortions -- a prohibition that's already in effect but which Congress must renew each year.
It would also go further. The bill would bar individuals and many employers from collecting tax credits for insurance plans covering abortion that they pay for privately and purchase through exchanges established under Obama's Affordable Care Act. It would also block the District of Columbia from using its money to cover abortions for lower-income women.
The House had approved the same measure last year but it went nowhere in the Senate, then run by Democrats. Its fate in this year's GOP-led Senate is uncertain.
In its veto message, the White House said, "The administration strongly opposes legislation that unnecessarily restricts women's reproductive freedom and consumers' private insurance options."
The action came the day of the annual March for Life protesting the Supreme Court's 1973 decision legalizing abortion. It also came with GOP leaders eager to showcase the ability of the new Republican-led Congress to govern efficiently and avoid gridlock.
The bill that was postponed would have banned abortions after the 20th week of pregnancy but allow exemptions for some victims of rape or incest and in cases when a woman's life was in danger. GOP leaders ran into problems because some GOP women and other lawmakers objected that the rape and incest exemptions covered only women who had reported the crimes to authorities.
Those rebellious Republicans argued that that requirement put unfair pressure on women who had already suffered. A 2013 Justice Department report calculated that only 35 percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to police.
Political pressures cut both ways. GOP leaders had resisted the awkwardness of postponing a high-profile abortion vote scheduled for the day of the anti-abortion march. But they didn't want to push anti-abortion legislation through the House that was opposed by GOP women, especially as the party tries appealing to more female voters ahead of the 2016 elections.
Yet when the leaders considered eliminating the requirement that rapes and incest be previously reported, they encountered objections from anti-abortion groups, Republican aides said. They chose not to anger that powerful GOP constituency.
A report Tuesday by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, citing the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, estimated that about 10,000 abortions annually are performed 20 weeks or later into pregnancies. The budget office estimated that if the bill became law, three-fourths of those abortions would instead occur before the 20th week.

Colorado baker faces complaint for refusing anti-gay message on cake

DENVER –  A dispute over a cake in Colorado raises a new question about gay rights and religious freedom: If bakers can be fined for refusing to serve married gay couples, can they also be punished for declining to make a cake with anti-gay statements?
A baker in suburban Denver who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding is fighting a legal order requiring him to serve gay couples even though he argued that would violate his religious beliefs.
But now a separate case puts a twist in the debate over discrimination in public businesses, and it underscores the tensions that can arise when religious freedom intersects with a growing acceptance of gay couples.
Marjorie Silva, owner of Denver's Azucar Bakery, is facing a complaint from a customer alleging she discriminated against his religious beliefs.
According to Silva, the man who visited last year wanted a Bible-shaped cake, which she agreed to make. Just as they were getting ready to complete the order, Silva said the man showed her a piece of paper with hateful words about gays that he wanted written on the cake. He also wanted the cake to have two men holding hands and an X on top of them, Silva said.
She said she would make the cake, but declined to write his suggested messages on the cake, telling him she would give him icing and a pastry bag so he could write the words himself. Silva said the customer didn't want that.
"It's just horrible. It doesn't matter if, you know, if you're Catholic, or Jewish, or Christian, if I'm gay or not gay or whatever," said Silva, 40, adding that she has made cakes regularly for all religious occasions. "We should all be loving each other. I mean there's no reason to discriminate."
Discrimination complaints to Colorado's Civil Rights Division, which is reviewing the matter, are confidential. For that reason, Silva declined to share the correspondence she has received from state officials on the case. KUSA-TV reported the complainant is Bill Jack of Castle Rock, a bedroom community south of Denver.
In a statement to the television station, Jack said he believes he "was discriminated against by the bakery based on my creed."
"As a result, I filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division. Out of respect for the process, I will wait for the director to release his findings before making further comments."
Jack did not respond to emails from The Associated Press seeking comment. No one answered the door at the address listed for Jack in Castle Rock.
The case comes as Republicans in Colorado's Legislature talk about changing the state law requiring that businesses serve gays in the wake of a series of incidents where religious business owners rejected orders to celebrate gay weddings. Republican Sen. Kevin Lundberg said the new case shows a "clash of values" and argued Colorado's public accommodation law is not working.
"The state shouldn't come in and say to the individual businessman, 'You must violate your religious — and I'll say religious-slash-moral convictions. This baker (Silva), thought that was a violation of their moral convictions. The other baker, which we all know very well because of all the stories, clearly that was a violation of their religious convictions," Lundberg said.
But gay rights advocates say there is a significant difference in the cases. Silva refused to put specific words on a cake while Jack Phillips, the baker who turned away the gay couple, refused to make any wedding cake for them in principle.
"There's no law that says that a cake-maker has to write obscenities in the cake just because the customer wants it," said Mark Silverstein, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Colorado.
Phillips' attorneys had argued in court that requiring him to prepare a gay marriage cake would be akin to forcing a black baker to prepare a cake with a white supremacist message. But administrative law judge Robert N. Spencer disagreed, writing that business owners can refuse a specific message, but not service.
"In both cases, it is the explicit, unmistakable, offensive message that the bakers are asked to put on the cake that gives rise to the bakers' free speech right to refuse," administrative law judge Robert N. Spencer said.
Phillips' attorney, Nicolle Martin, said she has sympathy for Silva, arguing she is in the same category as her client. "I absolutely support her right to decline," Martin said. "I support her right as an American to pick and choose the messages she will express."
Silva said she remains shaken up by the incident. "I really think I should be the one putting the complaint against him, because he has a very discriminating message," she said.

Death of Saudi King Abdullah brings uncertain new era for US in Middle East

The death of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah early Friday has launched an uncertain new era for U.S. officials to negotiate amid the spreading influence of Iran and the ongoing battle to roll back gains made by the Islamic State terror group in Iraq and Syria.
A former U.S. diplomat close to the Saudi royal family told Fox News Thursday that the death of the 90-year-old King, along with this week's collapse of the U.S.-supported government in Yemen, was a "worst-case scenario" because it removed another obstacle to Iran expanding its reach in the region. The former diplomat said that Tehran's influence could now be seen in four Middle Eastern capitals -- Sana'a in Yemen, as well as Baghdad, Damascus, and to a lesser extent, Beirut. 
Abdullah, a Sunni Arab, made one of the main priorities of his rule countering mainly Shiite Iran whenever it tried to make advances in the region. He also backed Sunni factions against Tehran's allies in several countries, but in Lebanon, for example, the policy failed to stop Iranian-backed Hezbollah from gaining the upper hand. And Tehran and Riyadh's colliding ambitions stoked proxy conflicts around the region that enflamed Sunni-Shiite hatreds — most notably and terribly in Syria's civil war, where the two countries backed opposing sides. Those conflicts in turn hiked Sunni militancy that returned to threaten Saudi Arabia.
With the death of Abdullah, decision-making in Riyadh is likely to be more cautious on issues like Iran and Syria, former U.S. diplomat Dennis Ross told the Wall Street Journal. 
Citing Saudi officials, the paper reports that King Abdullah became less fond of the U.S. in the final years of his reign. The king repeatedly pushed Obama to lend stronger backing to the rebels against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, against whom he bore a personal animus, and was reportedly furious when airstrikes threatened against Damascus by Obama in the summer of 2013 did not come to pass. 
The officials also said that the late king took a dim view of ongoing talks between the U.S. and Iran over the latter nation's nascent nuclear program, seeing it as a sign that Washington was more than willing to work behind its ally's back. 
King Abdullah's death may also open up a bigger power vacuum in Riyadh than first believed. His successor, 79-year-old half-brother Prince Salman, had recently taken on some of the ailing Abdullah's responsibilities. However, the Journal reports that U.S. officials do not consider him to be a strong or healthy ruler in his own right, which raises the possibility that others in the royal family could come to the forefront. 
The Journal reports that one of the first and biggest questions to face the Saudi king is what to do about the ongoing unrest in Yemen, where gains by Shiite Houthi rebels forced the resignation of the country's president and entire government Thursday. 
There is also the question of what to do about the ongoing U.S.-led bombing campaign against the Islamic State, better known as ISIS. The late King Abdullah was so fearful of the group's growing power that he committed Saudi airpower to strike the Sunni insurgency. 
Among the other decisions facing Salman is whether he will continue the country's ongoing strategy of increased levels of oil production. The country produced 9.6 million barrels a day in January, according to Platts, the energy information division of McGraw Hill. That's enough to satisfy 11 percent of global demand, despite a global price drop of nearly 60 percent since June. 
The price of U.S. crude was up 88 cents, or 1.9 percent, to $47.19 a barrel in after-hours trading Thursday.