Biden Cartoon

Hillary moneyman highlights new Saudi connection

The Saudi government, under increasing criticism over civilian casualties from its airstrikes in Yemen and a harsh crackdown on political dissidents at home, has just hired a powerhouse Washington, D.C., lobbying firm headed by a top Hillary Clinton fundraiser — an arrangement that critics charge raises fresh questions about the influence that foreign government lobbyists could have on her campaign.

The Saudi contract with the Podesta Group, owned by veteran Washington lobbyist and Clinton campaign bundler Tony Podesta, calls for the firm to provide “public relations” and other services on behalf of the royal court of King Salman.

It included an initial “project fee” payment of $200,000 last month and unspecified further sums over the course of the next year, according to documents recently filed with the Justice Department Foreign Agents Registration Act office.

The retention comes at a time when the Saudis are being condemned by United Nations officials over reports that their bombings against Houthi strongholds in Yemen’s civil war have resulted in the deaths and injuries of hundreds of innocent civilians, including children.

Adding to the international pressure, the Saudis are also facing criticism from human rights groups over their continued refusal to allow basic rights to women (e.g., the freedom to drive cars). They are also being criticized for their hard-line domestic suppression of political dissidents, with draconian punishments such as the sentence — by beheading — recently given to a 20-year-old Shiite political protester.

“They are very nervous about an American policy change, and so they are betting on the horse they think will win — Hillary Clinton,” said Ali Al-Ahmad, a Saudi analyst with the Institute for Gulf Affairs, and a frequent critic of the regime, about the hiring of the Podesta Group.

The Podesta Group is now on a roster of a half-dozen D.C. lobbying firms representing the Saudis, including the giant international law firm DLA Piper and the firm Hogan Lovells, whose principal on the Saudi account is former Minnesota Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, who chairs the Congressional Leadership Fund, a super-PAC that is a major source of House GOP campaign funds. (Former Texas congressman Tom Loeffler, a top bundler for Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign, for years represented the Saudis, but his current firm, Akin Gump, now lobbies for the United Arab Emirates, among other foreign clients.)

But the retention of the Podesta Group has gotten attention in Washington lobbying circles because of its unusually close ties to Hillary Clinton’s campaign: Tony Podesta is the brother and former business partner of Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta. He is also a prolific Democratic Party fundraiser who is among 43 Washington lobbyists (many of whom also represent foreign governments) listed as Clinton campaign bundlers in reports filed by the campaign with the Federal Election Commission.

The reports disclose that Podesta had raised $140,175 for the Clinton campaign through Sept. 30. Two weeks ago, just days after filing its Saudi contract with the Justice Department, Podesta held a Clinton campaign fundraiser at his home that offered fine Italian food cooked by five gourmet chefs, including himself and his brother, the campaign chairman.

The Podesta Group point man on the Saudi account is David Adams, who previously served as assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs in 2011 and 2012, making him Clinton’s chief Capitol Hill lobbyist for her last two years as secretary of state, according to Justice Department filings reviewed by Yahoo News.

But Tony Podesta, while calling himself “a proud Clinton bundler,” vigorously denied that the Saudi contract had anything to do with his efforts to elect her president. “I’ve never had a conversation with Hillary Clinton or anybody in the campaign about the work of the firm,” Podesta said when reached by Yahoo News on his cellphone while he was dining at a restaurant in Sicily. “We represent a dozen foreign governments around the world — we do good work for them. And it has nothing to do with the Hillary Clinton campaign.”

Obama's foreign policy could burden Biden if he runs in 2016

When President Barack Obama announced this week that the United States would leave more troops than planned in Afghanistan, his vice president, Joe Biden, stood right at his side.

And for Biden, still mulling a presidential bid, that could pose a problem.

As he calculates all the angles that would influence his candidacy - a decision is reportedly coming within days - Biden has more than the looming obstacle of front-runner Hillary Clinton to consider. As a candidate, he would become the chief defender of a foreign policy that critics say has been incoherent and that gets increasingly low marks in public opinion polls.

Beyond Afghanistan, the White House is under fire for its response to Russian action in Syria, where Vladimir Putin has assumed the superpower role there that the United States has declined to take, for the enduring threat posed by Islamic State, and for the Iran nuclear deal that has spiked tensions with ally Israel.

Biden, who prides himself on being a full partner on Obama’s national security team, would own all of it. “Foreign policy is a liability for Biden,” Democratic strategist Douglas Schoen said.

The Afghanistan shift was a personal setback for Biden, the most influential voice in the administration pushing for hard timelines for the removal of U.S. troops from the country. Clinton, by contrast, favored a more robust military presence there during her tenure as secretary of state during Obama's first term.
Clinton, whose status as the prohibitive front-runner wouldn't change even if Biden jumps in, has distanced herself from Obama by calling for more aggressive action in Syria and opposing the Pacific Rim trade deal. As a sitting vice president, Biden wouldn't have the luxury of distancing himself from Obama's policies, even if he were so inclined.

View gallery

President Barack Obama, left, standing with Vice President Joe Biden, right, listen as Diana Caldero …

“How does a presidential aspirant like Joe Biden reach for a bold American foreign policy without fundamentally distancing himself from his boss? It’s tough,” said Aaron David Miller, a former official in the Clinton and Bush administrations who is now with the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Obama’s approval ratings with the U.S. public on foreign policy have tumbled since Biden stood at the Democratic National Convention three years ago and pronounced, “Osama bin Laden is dead and General Motors is alive.”
According to Gallup, Obama enjoyed about a 50 percent approval rating on foreign affairs during his first term. That number fell to 36 percent this summer.
National security is often overshadowed in U.S. presidential races by domestic issues, most notably jobs and economic growth.
But with the economy on a firmer footing that means it is not drowning out other issues for voters, some Republicans such as U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida are trying to put more of a spotlight on foreign policy.
Rubio regularly blasts Obama on the campaign trail and said of Biden: “He’s been wrong time and again on issue after issue."
“He would be a disastrous commander-in-chief,” Rubio told radio host Hugh Hewitt in August, as speculation about Biden’s intentions began to swirl.
Biden’s reputation took a hit when it was revealed that he had advised against the U.S. military raid that killed bin Laden in 2011.
He was a firm supporter of a reduced U.S. role in Iraq, which the administration’s detractors argue created a vacuum that strengthened the rise of Islamic State. Biden also resisted arming rebel groups in Syria.
Clinton recently called for a "no fly" zone in Syria, which both Obama and Biden oppose.

Should he run, Biden “has to establish his own identity,” but to do so he would have to highlight times when he privately disagreed with Obama, said Anthony Cordesman, an expert on U.S. security policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Biden’s supporters say he could point to his decades in the Senate, especially his years chairing the Foreign Relations Committee, to counter Republican arguments that he would simply be an extension of Obama's world view. For example, Biden has been friends for decades with Benjamin Netanyahu. Obama, by contrast, has a frosty relationship with the Israeli prime minister.

Donald Trump says true thing about 9/11 and Jeb! is having none of it

Last night, things got even more fun when Jeb! decided to come at the Donald via everyone’s favorite social media platform for discussing large complex topics.
What kicked this newest incident off was an interview Trump did with Bloomberg, during which he said:

When you talk about George Bush, I mean, say what you want, the World Trade Center came down during his time…He was president, OK?…Blame him, or don’t blame him, but he was president. The World Trade Center came down during his reign.

This is a 100% factual claim, which is a weird thing to say after a Donald Trump quote, but here we are. Jeb! (whose last name is Bush) wasn’t thrilled with this statement and took to Twitter to let everyone know.
This is similar to a Jeb! quote from the last republican debate, which also made its way into another confusing tweet.
There is a certain morbid hilarity in the idea of a picture of Bush standing atop the rubble of a terrorist attack and proclaiming he “Kept us safe.” This is a weird talking point that Jeb! just refuses to abandon, despite the fact that every time he says it everyone legitimately wonders if he just flat out doesn’t remember 9/11.
By the way, Jeb! should know way more things about his brother. Little things, like his birthday and wife and children’s names should probably be on the list of “things you know for sure about your brother.”
Of course, coming at Trump on Twitter is a risky proposition, because he will respond, and he will be mean, and he will put a period before that @ to make sure everyone sees it.
Once again, these are true statements. It’s an empirical fact that the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 happened during the presidency of George W. Bush. If Jeb! wants to argue to finer points of why his brother shouldn’t be blamed or how his policies in the aftermath of the attack were good (which would be a monumentally difficult task, because they were not), fine, he can do that. But he really needs to stop just saying “he kept us safe,” because it’s way too easy to point to that one day and say “No, I don’t believe he did.”

Jeb responds to Trump comments on George W. Bush and 9/11 attacks

Jeb Bush on Friday night defended brother and former President George W. Bush after fellow GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump suggested that he shares blame for the 9/11 terror attacks.
Bush, a former Florida governor, called Trump’s criticism “pathetic.”
The front-running Trump made his comments earlier Friday while speaking on Bloomberg Television about how and why, if elected, he could best handle national emergencies.
“Blame him or don’t blame him, but (Bush) was president,” Trump said. “The World Trade Center came down during his reign.”
Jeb Bush responded on Twitter, saying “How pathetic for @realdonaldtrump to criticize the president for 9/11. We were attacked & my brother kept us safe.”
This is not the first time Bush has during his 2016 campaign had to defend his older brother, in trying to distinguish himself from the Bush family political dynasty and be his “own man.”
In the second GOP presidential primary debate, Bush defended similar criticism from Trump, after he acknowledged that his foreign policy advisers would likely come from the administrations of his brother George W. and his father, former President George H. W. Bush.
“You remember the rubble” at the World Trade Center? He sent a clear signal that the United States would be strong and fight Islamic terrorism, and he did keep us safe,” Bush said to huge audience applause.
Trump responded: “You feel safe right now? I don’t feel so safe.”

'How to stab a Jew': Israel at UN condemns Palestinian president for inciting violence

A Palestinian disguised as a photojournalist stabbed an Israeli soldier in Hebron Friday, the same day Palestinians torched a site honored by the Jewish community as the tomb of the biblical figure Joseph.
The latest round of violence and bloodshed came as the United Nations Security Council held an emergency meeting on the fighting. Speaking before the meeting, new Israeli Ambassador Danny Danon displayed a Palestinian diagram meant to incite violence, entitled: "How to stab a Jew."
He blamed the Palestinian government and media for provoking attacks among children and teenagers. “You can see with this picture what incitement looks like,” he added.
The Palestinian ambassador to the United Nations, Riyad Mansour, blamed what he called Israeli "terror" through its occupation of East Jerusalem. He said such actions "will not break the will of our people."
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Samantha Power condemned the deadly attacks, urging world leaders to tone down harsh rhetoric, or "any actions that can feed the violence."
Friday’s stabbing occurred on the sidelines of fighting between Israeli troops and Palestinian stone-throwers. A Palestinian man wearing a T-shirt with the word "press" in large letters stabbed and wounded the Israeli soldier before troops shot and killed the attacker.
At one point, shouts were heard, followed by several gunshots. Troops rushed to the scene of the stabbing, near a military jeep, and administered aid to the injured soldier who was eventually taken away by ambulance. The attacker lay on the ground, clutching a knife in his right hand.
The incident heightened concerns among journalists about their safety. The Foreign Press Association for Israel and the Palestinian territories said it "marks a worrying development" that demands all media operate with greater caution.
"We utterly deplore this violation of press privilege and call on local Palestinian media organizations to immediately verify all media credentials," the FPA said in a statement.
The attacker's name has not been released, but local journalists said they did not know him.
In Nablus, another West Bank city, Palestinians firebombed the tomb, an attack condemned as "irresponsible" by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Flames blackened exterior walls of the small stone structure, a scene of Israeli-Palestinian clashes in the past.
Confrontations also erupted in the biblical town of Bethlehem and the Israel-Gaza border.
In Gaza, hundreds approached a border crossing with Israel, throwing stones and drawing Israeli fire that killed one Palestinian and wounded two, health officials said. In Bethlehem, dozens of Palestinians hurled stones and firebombs at Israeli troops who responded with tear gas, rubber-coated steel pellets and live rounds.
In the past month, eight Israelis were killed in Palestinian attacks, most of them stabbings. During the same period, 34 Palestinians were killed by Israeli fire -- 15 labeled by Israel as attackers, and the others in clashes between stone-throwers and Israeli troops.
Many of the Palestinian assailants are from east Jerusalem, the sector of the city captured by Israel in 1967 and sought by the Palestinians as a future capital. The recent attacks have largely been carried out by individuals with no ties to militant groups. The violence comes at a time when a possible partition of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean into two states -- Palestine alongside Israel -- is fading fast.
In response to the stabbings, Israel has taken unprecedented measures, including setting up checkpoints in Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem this week despite Israel's long-standing assertion that the city is united.
In one area, men passing through a checkpoint Friday said they lined up and ordered by troops to lift their hands and shirts to show they were unarmed before being allowed to pass.
Israel also imposed restrictions on Muslim worship at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound, Islam's third holiest site in Jerusalem's walled Old City. Men under 40 were barred from the shrine, and hundreds of young worshippers spread out prayer mats on streets leading to the Old City.
The Muslim-run shrine, also revered by Jews as the holiest site of their religion, has been at the root of recent tensions. Palestinian and Muslim leaders have alleged Israel is attempting to change long-standing arrangements that bar Jews from praying on the hilltop compound, a claim denied by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. However, several senior members of Netanyahu's coalition have called for Jewish prayer rights at the site, once home to biblical Jewish Temples.
The widespread perception among Palestinians that Al-Aqsa is under threat from Israel has fomented tensions and violence.
Abbas has tried to lower the temperature, telling his security commanders that armed attacks on Israelis counter Palestinian interests. However, he has also told his security forces not to stop Palestinian stone-throwers heading to confrontations with Israeli troops.
Abbas on Friday condemned the Nablus arson as "irresponsible," ordered an investigation into who was behind it and said repairs would begin immediately, according to the official Palestinian news agency WAFA.
Dore Gold, a senior Israeli Foreign Ministry official, said the site was targeted "just because it is a place in which Jews pray." Lt. Col. Peter Lerner, an Israeli army spokesman, said the attack violates freedom of worship and that the military will "bring the perpetrators of this despicable act to justice."
For centuries, the site has been identified with the biblical Joseph but some Palestinians say it was a sheikh's grave or used as a mosque. The tomb has become a popular prayer site in recent years among some sects of religious Jews.
The site is located in an area under Palestinian self-rule and visits by Jews are coordinated between Palestinian security forces and Israeli troops.

Hillary Cartoon

Fact Check: Obama claims Afghan combat mission over – despite airstrikes, special ops

Report: US believed Afghan hospital was Taliban base

President Obama may be stretching when he assures the American public that combat operations in Afghanistan ended last year.

The president repeated the claim Thursday as he announced 5,500 U.S. troops would remain in Afghanistan after 2016. "Last December, more than 13 years after our nation was attacked by Al Qaeda on 9/11, America’s combat mission in Afghanistan came to responsible end," Obama said from the White House, flanked by Vice President Biden, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Joe Dunford and Defense Secretary Ash Carter.

But this year alone, the U.S. military has carried out more than 328 airstrikes, dropping 629 bombs since January, according to U.S. Air Force Central Command. That amounts to roughly one U.S. airstrike a day since the president announced that combat operations had ended during his State of the Union address in January. So far this year, 25 U.S. service members have been killed in Afghanistan.

During his January address, Obama said U.S. troops have moved to a “support role.” He said, “Together with our allies, we will complete our mission there by the end of this year, and America's longest war will finally be over."

Obama backed off his pledge Thursday to end the war by the end of the year, but maintained that the combat mission is over and said the mission of those staying behind will not change. The remaining U.S. forces will be based at three air bases in Bagram, Kandahar and Jalalabad, and will only be authorized to train Afghans and hunt Al Qaeda.

"Our forces engage in two missions -- training Afghan forces and supporting counterterror operations against remnants of Al Qaeda," the president said at the White House.

Carter told reporters the same from the Pentagon: "The combat mission has ended and our mission now, on a day-to-day basis, is train, advise and assist and counterterrorism and only to undertake other kinds of operations, either to protect our own forces or in an extremist situation."

The administration argues that despite sustained airstrikes, that mission nevertheless counts as “counterterrorism” and not “combat.” A Fox News reporter asked Pentagon Press Secretary Peter Cook on Thursday to clarify Carter's remarks that "combat" is over and the "counterterror" mission remains.

"I think we've talked about it a lot,” Cook said. “It’s clear when we're talking about the counterterror mission – the target is remnants of Al Qaeda."

Yet these restrictions may also be a misrepresentation of the reality on the ground in Afghanistan.

For example, the actions of U.S. Special Operations forces on the ground in Kunduz show U.S. troops are doing more than "training Afghan forces" or targeting Al Qaeda. A U.S. Special Forces team called in the airstrike on Oct. 3 that hit a Kunduz hospital run by Doctors Without Borders. The hospital had been suspected of having a Taliban presence; the head of U.S. forces in Afghanistan Gen. John Campbell told reporters it was the Afghans who requested the airstrike. The U.S. has since called the strike a mistake.

Separately, a press release from U.S. Forces-Afghanistan revealed that beginning Oct. 7, the U.S. military “conducted 63 precision strikes while Afghan forces engaged in several battles on the ground against al-Qaeda networks at two related sites.” A large cache of weapons was seized by 200 U.S. and Afghan ground forces.

The two training sites were located in Kandahar, Afghanistan, the same area where Usama bin Laden set up training camps in the 1990s. According to the statement, one of the camps was 30 square miles, half the size of Washington, D.C.
Jennifer Griffin currently serves as a national security correspondent for FOX News Channel . She joined FNC in October 1999 as a Jerusalem-based correspondent.