Another Key Senate Democrat Senator Opposes Iran Deal

“I’ve got a newsflash for you. Israel is on the same continent as Iran. So those intercontinental ballistic missiles are not for us. They’re for you.” ~ Ron Dermer, Israel’s Ambassador to the United States

Today in Washington, D.C. - Aug. 18, 2015: Congress is on their August recess. Constituents still have an opportunity to discuss the Iran Nuke Deal with with their senator. So far, all Republicans and now two democrats oppose the deal. However, that is still not enough opponents to override the Senates vote. To view where your two Senators stand visit "The Iran Scorecard." It identifies who is "On the Fence," who "Stands With Iran," and who "Stands With America."

Contributing Author Gary Bauer noted yesterday, "Critics of President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran have argued that the numerous concessions, including as much as $100 billion in sanctions relief, make the radical Islamic regime stronger and will be used to fund its terrorist activities. The leaders of the regime are confirming those fears."

Over the weekend, Ali Akbar Velayati, a key adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, said: "The Islamic Republic of Iran will always support the current (Resistance Front) and of course, with the nuclear agreement, it will have more power to side with its friends in the region." And by "friends in the region," Velayati is referring to Hamas, Hezbollah and the Assad regime in Syria.

Any hope that this deal represented a change for the better was dashed today when Ayatollah Khamenei said: "[The Americans] thought this deal . . . will open up Iran to their influence. We blocked this path and will definitely block it in the future. We won't allow American political, economic or cultural influence in Iran."

Bauer adds, "Any member of Congress who votes for this deal does so knowing that Iran is not moderating and remains an avowed enemy of America and Israel. That's one reason why Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona came out against the deal over the weekend."

Flake was heavily courted by the Obama White House, hoping that his support would give the deal the appearance of bi-partisan support. He traveled with the president to Africa recently and was with Secretary of State John Kerry in Cuba last week. But now the only bi-partisan aspect of the Iran deal is the opposition against it.

In announcing his opposition, Flake said: "While Congress has received assurances from the administration that it does not forfeit its ability to impose sanctions on Iran for behavior on the non-nuclear side, these assurances do not square with the text of the [Iran agreement]. . . As written, this agreement gives Iran leverage it currently doesn't have. . . . Hoping that Iran's nuclear ambitions might change after a 15-year sabbatical might be a bet worth making. Believing that Iran's regional behavior will change tomorrow -- while giving up tools to deter or modify such behavior -- is not."

Weeks ago, Iran told us that it would refuse to allow U.S. personnel to serve on the international inspection teams responsible for verifying Tehran's compliance with the proposed nuclear deal. That should have been a non-starter for any American administration, but the Obama/Kerry team accepted it.

Now the regime is making even more demands. Yesterday, Iran's deputy foreign minister claimed that every U.N. inspector must be vetted and approved by Iran's intelligence service. Sayyed Abbas Araqchi said, "Any individual, out of [the International Atomic Energy Agency's] inspection group, who is not approved by the Islamic of Republic of Iran cannot enter the country as the agency's inspector."

Former Pentagon adviser Michael Rubin blasted this latest concession, saying:"Administration claims that this was the best possible agreement are pathetic. First Kerry abandoned anytime, anywhere inspections. . . . Then we learned that no Americans are allowed on the inspection teams and that Iran will do its own soil sampling. Now the Iranians claim that all IAEA inspectors have to be vetted by Iranian intelligence? It really can't get any worse than this."
Bauer notes, "This deal gets us nothing. Some have naively suggested that the deal strengthens the hands of moderates in Iran. But the moderates are not in charge. Iran is a dictatorship run by Ayatollah Khamenei, who routinely chants, 'Death to America" and "Death to Israel.'

"The ayatollah isn't moderating nor does he see this deal as a breakthrough in relations. According to Iran's Tasnim News Agency, the ayatollah yesterday "made it clear that Tehran's policy toward the U.S. will remain unchanged." That policy is 'Death to America" and "Death to Israel.'"

Yesterday the ayatollah tweeted: "We support resistance in Palestine and the region, and take all possible means to support anyone who fights Israel, is against the Zionist regime and supports resistance."

A newly revealed video produced under the auspices of the Iranian regime in early August threatens and visualizes the destruction of Israel at the hands of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and Iranian Middle East proxies, The Investigative Project on Terrorism reported on Monday. Check out this video showing an Iranian conquest of Jerusalem.

Yesterday, The New York Times wrote, “From his rented vacation home in Martha’s Vineyard with sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean, President Obama has been making phone calls to Democratic members of Congress, trying to rally support for the nuclear deal with Iran that faces a vote next month. . . .

“The personal appeals from the president are part of an orchestrated lobbying effort by the White House, supported by a coalition of antiwar and progressive organizations, aimed at persuading Democrats who are undecided about the nuclear agreement with Iran to vote against a Republican bid to block it. . . .

“The battle is centering on Democrats after supporters lost perhaps their only opportunity to win a Republican backer on Saturday, when Senator Jeff Flake of Arizona said he would join the rest of his party and vote to reject the deal.”

The administration lost another high profile Senate Democrat today as Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), the former chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, announced his opposition to the Iran deal.

According to The Hill, “Sen. Bob Menendez on Tuesday announced his opposition to President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran, becoming the second Senate Democrat to defy the White House on a top foreign policy priority.

“‘I have looked into my own soul and my devotion to principle may once again lead me to an unpopular course, but if Iran is to acquire a nuclear bomb, it will not have my name on it,’ Menendez (D-N.J.) said in a speech Tuesday afternoon, according prepared remarks. ‘It is for these reasons that I will vote to disapprove the agreement and, if called upon, would vote to override a veto,’ Menendez said.

“The decision, though expected, strikes another blow to the administration's efforts to rally support for the deal as Congress prepares to vote on it in September. . . . Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), the Senate's third-ranking Democrat, announced his opposition on Aug. 6.”

The Washington Free Beacon shares more of Sen. Menendez’ reasoning. “The senator, who has led the charge to impose harsh economic sanctions on Iran, said the deal would do little to rein in Iran’s nuclear weapons program and went on to lash out at President Barack Obama’s portrayal of the deal.

“‘President Obama continues to erroneously say that this agreement permanently stops Iran from having a nuclear bomb,’ he said. ‘Let’s be clear, what the agreement does is to recommit Iran not to pursue a nuclear bomb, a promise they have already violated in the past. It recommits them to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), an agreement they have already violated in the past. It commits them to a new Security Council Resolution outlining their obligations, but they have violated those in the past as well.’

“The deal ‘leaves Iran with the core element of a robust nuclear infrastructure,’ Menendez said, contradicting remarks by senior Obama administration officials.

“Menendez also pushed back against Obama’s claim that those who oppose the deal favor war with Iran.

“‘The president and Secretary Kerry have repeatedly said that the choice is between this agreement or war,’ he said. ‘I reject that proposition, as have most witnesses, including past and present administration members involved in the Iran nuclear issue, who have testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and who support the deal but reject the binary choice between the agreement or war.’

“After outlining the conditions required for a good deal, Menendez flatly declared that the deal fails to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon at any time it chooses.

“‘The agreement that has been reached failed to achieve the one thing it set out to achieve—it failed to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state at a time of its choosing. In fact, it authorizes and supports the very road map Iran will need to arrive at its target,’ he said.”

Meanwhile, other key Democrat senators aren’t exactly rushing to endorse the deal. The Hill reports, “Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) has yet to say whether he’ll support President Obama’s nuclear deal with Iran, angering liberal groups who want to see congressional Democrats rally around the agreement.

Eighteen Senate Democrats remain undecided on the deal, which is opposed by New York Sen. Charles Schumer, the retiring Reid’s hand-picked successor in the next Congress. . . .

“Reid plans to wait until Congress returns from the August recess on Sept. 8 before announcing his decision. . . . Reid told Nevada political commentator Jon Ralston and other reporters last week that he is still studying the complex agreement.

“‘I have some papers I need study. I finished reading the document, a hundred and some-odd pages. But the one thing I need to do — I have people I need to meet with. I need to meet with people who have been very good to me over the years,” he said. ‘You could probably figure out who some of them are. And I haven’t done that,’ he added. . . .

“They say that waiting gives Reid time to consult with heavy hitters in Nevada such as Brian Greenspun, the publisher and CEO of the Las Vegas Sun, and Sheldon Adelson, an opponent of the deal and major GOP donor who nevertheless has a good relationship with Reid.

“‘I’m not sure that Harry’s not doing this for maximum leverage for whatever. That seems to be the classic Harry Reid play. I talked to only a couple of people who think there’s any chance he’ll go against the deal,’ Ralston told The Hill Monday. ‘It’s clear to me that he wants to go and talk to people like Brian Greenspun and Sheldon Adelson and whatever other prominent Jewish leaders there are in Nevada to explain why he’s going to do what he’s going to do,’ he added. ‘My guess is Sheldon Adelson thinks he can turn him on the deal. They have a much closer relationship than people think.’”

Undecided Democrats would do well to read Foreign Relations Committee Chair Bob Corker’s (R-TN) op-ed for The Washington Post today explaining why the deal should be rejected.

“Rather than end Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, over time this deal industrializes the program of the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism,” Sen. Corker writes.

“For a deal that must be built on verification and not trust, the inspections process is deeply flawed. Through verbal presentations regarding possible military dimensions, many in Congress are aware of the unorthodox arrangements agreed to by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the administration and our negotiating partners to keep from upsetting Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Those actual agreements remain secret, but we know that at best they are most unusual and speak to the P5+1’s low commitment to holding Iran’s feet to the fire.”

He adds, “Many say now is the time for the United States to push back against Iran. The best way to do that is for Congress to reject an agreement that strengthens Iran with hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade, removes the conventional weapons and ballistic missile technology embargoes on Iran and allows for a U.S.-approved, industrial-scale enrichment program for which Iran has zero practical need.

“We have more leverage than we will ever have, but under this deal that leverage will flip in approximately nine months, when most major sanctions are relieved. Iran will further deepen its regional strength.

“Unfortunately, the agreement ties our hands in countering Iran’s efforts. If we try to push back, Iran will threaten to speed up its nuclear development since it already will have a windfall of money, a rapidly growing economy and alliances built with our partners, who will feast on the mercantile benefits of doing business with Iran.

“The idea that a future president will somehow have the same options available as today, when Iran is poor and isolated, is fanciful.”

---

Tags: Iran Deal, Scorecard, Senators, Republicans, Democrats, Sen. Menendez, Iran, radical actions, destroy Israel video, nuke deal To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!