News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles.Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Follow @arra Contact: email@example.com (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Friday, August 28, 2015
Bring It On, Hillary!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Desperate to change the subject from her email scandal and flailing campaign, Hillary Clinton went on the attack yesterday, comparing pro-life conservatives to Islamic terrorists.
"Now, extreme views about women we expect that from some of the terrorist groups. . . But it's a little hard to take coming from Republicans who want to be president of the United States," Clinton said.
Don't miss the irony here, friends. Hillary is part of the leftist culture in America that uses every verbal summersault possible to avoid making any connection between Islam and Al Qaeda, Hamas, ISIS, etc. But it has no problem connecting American conservatism to those groups.
Of course, the reality is that the Obama/Clinton Administration has barely lifted a finger to combat the religious persecution committed by the Islamic movement that is raping women and selling them into the sex trade. That battle has been led by conservatives.
The Obama Administration has gone into court suing American businesses that say the Muslim hijab, which many view as a symbol of submission, violates their dress code. It is conservatives who say Muslim practices that belittle women should not be imported into the U.S.
It is the left that says American women should get used to going into a ladies' room and finding a man using the facilities because he feels like he is a woman. It is conservatives who say this is a violation of a woman's right to privacy.
It is Hillary Clinton and the left who says it should be legal for people to abort babies because they are little unborn girls. It is conservatives who argue that sex-selection abortion is abhorrent and should not be permitted.
Of course abortion was most likely the issue that Hillary Clinton was alluding to in her comments. To the left, there is no more important right for women than the right to destroy innocent human life. Yet conservatives who champion the sanctity of life are somehow equivalent to the barbaric marauders of ISIS.
If Hillary Clinton wants to have a debate about extreme views, bring it on!
But whoever wins the 2016 Republican presidential nomination must be someone with the guts to fight back against this kind of outrageous rhetoric because this is exactly the kind of campaign that will be run by the left against the GOP candidate.
No amount of compromise or seeking common ground or desire for "adult conversations" will prevent the left from running a slash and burn smear campaign.
------------- Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families, Hillary Clinton,,pro-life conservatives, Islamic terrorists, 2016 electionsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Trump led the pack with 19 percent, Carson had 12 percent in second place, and Fiorina came in fifth place at 10 percent.
Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker tied Carson at 12 percent, and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush came in fourth at 11 percent.
So far, the GOP has 17 candidates on the ballot, 14 of whom currently hold or have held elective office either as governors or senators. And yet, the non-elected candidates are beating almost all of them.
Now what does that say?
In part, it’s simply an indictment of career politicians.
It may also point to a failing of the consultancy class that runs these campaigns that are so careful they manage not to say anything about any actual issues. The polls show, when you try to please nobody, you don’t end up pleasing anybody.
With Trump, Carson, and Fiorina, on the other hand, they do not speak like politicians.
But overall, it speaks volumes on the perception Republican voters have for the Republican Party. They must not trust their own leaders very much who have actually held office and presumably implemented policies.
Yet, when Republicans were in charge of both elected branches in the 2000s, voters watched as the national debt exploded; the entitlement state was expanded in Medicare; Washington, D.C. took over local education; amnesty for illegal immigrants was attempted; and at the end of it all, Wall Street was bailed out with trillions of dollars.
And since reclaiming congressional majorities in 2010, Republican Congresses have provided the funds necessary to implement Obamacare; when it came to the fiscal cliff, they allowed some taxes to be raised; and they gave funds to implement Obama’s executive amnesty for illegal immigrants with U.S.-born children.
So perhaps voters are fed up with politicians who say one thing when they’re running for office, and something else entirely when they get in.
Now, that is not to say that Trump, Carson, or Fiorina are not capable of breaking their promises, too – just that not having held elective office, they benefit from not having that sort of track record.
Perhaps that is why the consultants whisper to the career politicians not to say anything meaningful, lest it harm their fortunes down the road when they have to break their promises.
And, yet, the voters are sick of it.
How else to explain the rise of the non-politician in the 2016 Republican presidential field?
It remains to be seen how successful this brand of anti-Washington, D.C. populism will be when votes finally start getting cast in 2016. But at the moment, it represents a mortal threat to the Republican Party establishment that has spent more than two decades cultivating the current crop of candidates — who now appear headed for certain defeat at the hands of a voter-led rebellion against career politicians.
---------------- Robert Romano is the Senior Editor of Americans for Limited Government. His article was first shared on the ALG's NetRight Daily blog. Tags:Robert Romano, Americans For Limited Government, non-politician, Donald Trump, Ben Carson, Carly FiorinaTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:U.S., Senator, Mike Lee, R-UT, is a champion for limited government, repealing Obamacare, Protecting religious freedom, balancing the budget, editorial cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Rick Manning: The end of August continues to defy history as politics continues to dominate the news at a time when most in the arena normally are recharging their batteries in preparation for a very tough post-Labor Day session of Congress.
In the aftermath of the live on-air murder of two journalists, we are hearing the predictable cries for more gun control laws from those who have created the climate of victimhood and racial anger that appear to have led a deranged, pathetic man to become an assassin.
If, as the perpetrator contended, he was motivated by the tragedy in Charleston, S.C. months earlier, then it certainly can be inferred that those who used those murders to advance their political agendas by creating an increased climate of racial division should engage in some honest reexamination. It is clear that the only person responsible for the murder of the reporters was the perpetrator. It is equally clear that the incendiary rhetoric that has become commonplace since Ferguson, Mo. is creating the environment where the mentally deranged are susceptible to being pushed over the edge.
The evil raging inside the former broadcaster that led him to take the lives of those who were doing the job he had been fired from, is the same evil that resided in the man who prayed with an African American church group for an hour prior to executing them.
Evil exists, and failure to recognize it for what it is only allows it to grow. Rather than cast tragedies in simplistic wrong-headed directions, it is time for an examination of America’s heart problem that allows this kind of evil to seemingly flourish.
Speaking of evil, when Congress returns in September, they will face their greatest moral dilemma since the debate over ending slavery, when they decide whether to continue funding Planned Parenthood. In the wake of the release of a series of horrific videos exposing that organization as nothing more than a baby parts chop shop, ignorance is no longer an excuse, and tough choices will have to be made between what is seen as good politics and confronting evil.
There really is no excuse for a failure in courage. Every day, politicians ask those in uniformed service to our nation to put their lives on the line to protect America from those who mean to do us harm. It should not be too much to expect that these same leaders would put aside their fear of the negative political ramifications of “shutting down the government” in a showdown with Obama to stop providing taxpayer dollars to vile death merchants. It is this simple: anyone who votes to send a dime to Planned Parenthood might as well be taking the scalpel in their own hand and cutting through the face of an unborn black baby to get his intact brain while his heart is still beating. The next five weeks will define the very character of each of the 535 elected Members of Congress, I hope they realize it and have the courage to meet this moral crucible in our nation’s history.
On a much lighter note, Donald Trump has put the toupee issue to rest as he invited a woman from a South Carolina audience up on stage to check out his hair and provide independent verification that his bouffant is real. Somehow, I don’t think when she woke up that morning that she expected to make the national news as a Trump scalp inspector. The lesson is one a Boy Scout can appreciate — you never know what might be in store for you each day, so be prepared to make the most of it.
And in an interesting turn, presidential rivals, Senator Ted Cruz and Donald Trump will be appearing together at a rally against President Obama’s disastrously flawed Iranian nuclear deal. In the normal, dog-eat-dog political campaign world this is highly unusual. It would be wise for the other GOP contenders to take note that candidates can and should join common cause to prevent our nation from making a grievous mistake, and the Iran deal is just that. Not only does it provide terrorist-funding Iran $150 billion to disseminate putting our national interests at short term risk, but it also would put that rogue nation on a pathway to becoming a nuclear power. Every GOP presidential candidate should be raising the roof in demanding that the Iran deal be treated as a Treaty under the Constitution and voted down.
As August winds to an end, the seeds are being sown for the defining debates of the fall legislative season, setting the stage for the presidential nomination process. Over the next five weeks, choices will be made that will define our nation’s very future. Decisions that are much bigger than the normal political tug-of-war. These decisions will define who and what America will be as a nation and if the world will be a much more dangerous place for lovers of freedom.
--------------- Rick Manning (@rmanning957) is President of Americans for Limited Government. This article was also shared on NetRightDaily. Tags:Rick Manning, Americans for Limited Government, defining America, guns, planned parenthood, Iran, Trump's hair, choices, Nations' future To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Today In Washington, D.C. - August 28, 2015 Bill Smith, Editor: Congress is still on its August recess until Sept 8th. Many constituents are also reaching out to them and telling them to vote NO on the Iran Nuke Deal.
We must stop this bad deal. We must put pressure on Congress to reject this deal and prevent our children from inheriting a dangerous threat by this nuclear-armed regime.
This deal guarantees that our children will inherit a nuclear Iran – one that already chants "death to America" in the streets and burns our flag.
ACTION ITEM: 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."
Call your members of Congress right now at 202-224-3121. (Their staffs are working - Leave a message). Even if you have called before, call again. Discuss the following info and previously reported info on the Iran Nuke Deal Even if your representative or Senator has e already come out in favor of the deal, especially call them and express your anger over this sell out of America. If things continue on track, Iran will become capable of delivering nukes on America.
Tell them that they should not vote for any nuclear agreement that they have not fully read -- and they have not read these secret side deals. More importantly, they should not support any nuclear deal that allows Iran, given its history of deception, to self-inspect. Tell your senators and representative that Iran cannot be trusted. Tell them to oppose the Iranian nuclear deal. Then check out the names of Senators (all Democrats) still supporting this deal and call every friend or relative who lives in these Senators' states and beg them for the sake of future generations to Call their Senator.
Other News in Washington, D.C.
Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dealt a blow to a lawsuit against NSA’s bulk phone data collection.
Ellen Nakashima at the Washington Post reports, "A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that public interest lawyer Larry Klayman, the founder of Freedom Watch, has not proved his own phone records were collected by the NSA – and so has not met a condition of bringing the lawsuit.
"It sent the case back to a lower court for further deliberation on the issue.
"The panel’s ruling also reverses a ban on the NSA’s collection that had been imposed -and temporarily stayed-by a District Court judge in December 2013.
"But the ruling, which is strictly procedural, does not address the constitutionality or legality of the program."
The Post further noted, "Congress in June put an end to the program, passing a law that barred the government from collecting phone and other records in bulk. But the NSA is continuing to do so as it transitions the program to phone companies by December.
"In Friday’s ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sent the case back to the lower court for further deliberation on the standing issue.
"Circuit Court Judge Stephen F. Williams wrote that the lead plaintiff, conservative legal activist Larry Klayman, “lack[s] direct evidence” that records involving his calls “have actually been collected.”
"Klayman, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, is a customer of Verizon Wireless. The only phone company that the government has acknowledged was part of the program is Verizon Business Network Services.
"The Department of Justice declined to comment on the case.
"The panel’s ruling reverses the judgment of U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon found that Klayman “demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success” in his bid to prove that his Fourth Amendment right to privacy was violated and that the NSA program was likely unconstitutional." Tags: #BadIranDeal, bad Deal, Iran Nuke Deal, Secret side deals, Iran, Take Action, NSA, Phone Data Collection, DC Court of Appeals To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Rassmussen Reports in its Friday Morning Report identifies that "The Donald" Continues to make gains with voters including Republicans.This week, Donald Trump made headlines with a political rally in a football stadium and his televised confrontation with Univision activist/commentator Jorge Ramos. Rasmussen Reports’ latest Trump Change survey shows belief that Trump will be the next Republican presidential nominee inching up among both GOP voters and voters in general.
A new national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely Republican Voters now believe Trump is likely to be their party’s nominee for president in 2016, up barely from 57% a week ago. But the latest finding includes 29% who say a Trump nomination is Very Likely, a view shared last week by just 25%.
This compares to 27% of Republicans who felt a Trump nomination was likely when he formally announced his candidacy in mid-June. At that time, only nine percent (9%) felt Trump was Very Likely to be the GOP nominee.
Among all likely voters, 49% now think Trump is likely to be the eventual nominee, with 21% who say it’s Very Likely. This overall finding is unchanged from a week ago, but only 17% thought Trump was Very Likely to be nominated in that survey. Forty-six percent (46%) say Trump is not likely to be the nominee, including 21% who feel it is Not At All Likely.
Thirty-eight percent (38%) of GOP voters still think Trump is unlikely to be the eventual nominee, but that includes only 12% who say it’s Not At All Likely. . . . Rassmussen Reports comments:Trump now leads the pack of Republican hopefuls which has grown to include 17 major contenders. His bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, once seen as a pipe dream, is now a topic of serious discussion. . . .
Trump has seen a surge of support in part because of his tough talk on illegal immigration and has pulled the GOP field in his direction. Republican voters consider the Hispanic vote important to their presidential chances next year but aren’t overly concerned that a hard-line on illegal immigration will hurt them with those voters.
Men consider Trump’s nomination more likely than women do. Voters under 40 believe more strongly than their elders do that Trump is unlikely to be the nominee.
Conservatives feel much more strongly than moderates and liberals that the billionaire businessman is likely to be the GOP standard-bearer.
Voters who make less than $50,000 a year are more confident than those who earn more that Trump will win the nomination.
Trump during the first pre-primary debate reiterated a point he’s made throughout his campaign that “the big problem this country has is being politically correct." Most Americans agree. . . .---------------- Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information. For the detailed statistical analysis visit their site. Tags:Donald Trump, Edges Higher, Rassmussen ReportsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: Going into 2015, news media mavens had all but declared the race as settled: Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton. But voters didn't cooperate with their "betters." Republicans flocked to Donald Trump, a weirdly charismatic figure, and Democrats fell enthusiastically for Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-designated socialist.
Why hordes of regular folks prefer Trump over most of his rivals hardly needs extensive analysis: Trump is funny, appears "his own man," and serves as a sort of wild card.
But why Bernie?
Over at The Hill, H.A. Goodman offers three reasons . . . sort of. The first reason is a confused mishmash of polling blather. But check out Goodman's second and third reasons.
"Clinton can't win the Democratic nomination or presidency with the FBI as a running mate," Goodman notes in bold face type. And "Classified information has already been found within Clinton's emails and there's a great likelihood of more revelations pertaining to breaches in protocol. . . ."
So, the reason for Bernie's popularity is that Hillary is so bad a candidate?
Well, duh. She's always been a bad candidate.
Indeed, Hillary's a corrupt insider, while Sanders, like Trump, can be plausibly construed as an outsider. But, like Trump, that plausibility is superficial.
Sanders is a lifelong politician, and when challenged about this, his retort was that he has always stood against the monied interests. He thinks that doesn't make him a "career politician."
Maybe being a career politician means never having to look up the meaning of "career" or "politician."
This is Common Sense. I'm Paul Jacob.
------------------ Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service. Tags:Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Weekend with Bernie, Bernie Sanders, lifelong politician, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Deception from DHS: Haitian Illegal Immigrants Get Another TPS Extension
. . . "And that Includes All My Departments!"
In a new order signed by DHS Secretary Johnson, Haitian illegal immigrants will be granted a Temporary Protected Status (TPS) until January 2017.
TPS was first granted after the deadly Earthquake in 2010. Then Secretary Napolitano said the status would only be in place for 18 months for “temporary refuge for Haitian nationals who are currently in the United States and whose personal safety would be endangered by returning to Haiti is part of this Administration’s continuing efforts to support Haiti’s recovery.”
Those illegal immigrants -- some 60,000 people -- who otherwise would be deported have been able to stay in the US thanks to additional temporary orders. How long can the Obama Admin call this measure "temporary"?
But it is warse than that, others are being granted emporary Protected Status (TPS)
Here are the details from Judicial Watch: In yet another depiction of the nation’s flawed immigration policies, the Obama administration is extending a humanitarian measure designed to temporarily shield illegal immigrants from deportation during emergencies for the fifth time in five years. It’s officially known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS) but should be renamed permanent—or at least long-term—protected status.
It involves tens of thousands of Haitians, who were originally granted TPS after an earthquake devastated the poverty-stricken Caribbean island in 2010. Then Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said the benefit would last only 18 months and be limited to Haitian nationals who were in the United States as of January 12, 2010. The goal, according to Napolitano was to provide a “temporary refuge for Haitian nationals who are currently in the United States and whose personal safety would be endangered by returning to Haiti is part of this Administration’s continuing efforts to support Haiti’s recovery.”
More than five years later the Obama administration continues to allow the same group of foreigners, who would otherwise be deported, remain in the U.S. under the never-ending “temporary” measure. DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson made it official this week, extending TPS for Haitians an additional 18 months, through July 22, 2017. This will grant Haitians authorization to work in the U.S. and receive other taxpayer-funded benefits. “Haiti was initially designated for TPS on Jan. 21, 2010, after a major earthquake devastated the country,” the government announcement reads. “Following consultations with other federal agencies, the Department of Homeland Security has determined that current conditions in Haiti support extending the designation period for current TPS beneficiaries.”
Last year Johnson extended an existing TPS for Haitian nationals with no explanation or earthquake sob story mentioned in the official announcement. Previous to that, Napolitano renewed the measure every year after originally implementing it following the earthquake. This is referred to as a “re-designation” in the various DHS announcements. It allows at least 60,000 Haitians who should be deported to live and work in the U.S. Their children, of course, get a free education and other public benefits compliments of American taxpayers.
Like droves of foreign nationals from a number of struggling countries, Haitians have entered the U.S. illegally for years because their island nation has long been the poorest in the western hemisphere. However the U.S. has for years generously donated huge sums to Haiti and that includes $4 billion in post-earthquake assistance, according to State Department figures. The money keeps flowing and has helped provide shelter, healthcare, food, energy, education, security, jobs and a number of other essential needs.
Additionally, U.S. and international charities raised enormous sums of money for Haiti earthquake relief efforts. Dozens of groups and their affiliates raised $2.1 billion, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, and more than half ($1.43 billion) came from Americans. A group of famous singers also joined forces to record an album (Hope for Haiti Now) that quickly raised tens of millions of dollars for earthquake relief in Haiti.
Haitian illegal immigrants aren’t the only ones who have enjoyed the long-term benefits of the special measure intended to grant only temporary reprieve. Last year the Obama administration extended TPS for tens of thousands of Hondurans and Nicaraguans. The order was originally issued more than a decade and a half ago after a hurricane (Mitch) hit the Central American countries and has been renewed over and over again, illustrating that there’s nothing temporary about these measures. Less than a year ago the Obama administration created an 18-month TPS for African Ebola nations, including Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. Judicial Watch will monitor it upon its scheduled expiration and report if it gets extended like many of the others. Tags:DHS, Deception from DHS, Temporary Protected Status, TPS, Haitian Illegal Immigrants, Get Another TPS Extension, extended TPS, Hondurans, Nicaraguans, African Ebola nationsTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Editorial Cartoon, AF Branco, Hillary Clinton, email scandal, email server, bathroom on the leftTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Ann Coulter at The Heritage Foundation: Political commentator Ann Coulter believes that immigration is the most important issue facing America today. If we don’t get it right, she says, debates over economics, foreign policy, and other issues just won’t matter.
Coulter makes the case in her new book, “Adios, America,” that it has been the goal of liberals for decades to fundamentally transform America by bringing in millions of immigrants from third-world countries to build their voting base.
As those familiar with Coulter know, she speaks her mind. Watch the interview to find out what she told us.
Tags:Ann Coulter, Adios, America!, video, Heritage Foundation, immigration, illegal immigration, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Here in South Carolina we have "waste collection and recycling" centers conveniently located around the county. Instead of sending out an army of men and trucks to pick up trash door-to-door once a week, whether we need it or not, our county lets us take our trash to them. No charge (other than the small cost of operation added to our property taxes). No wasted miles, no noisy diesel trucks fouling the air, no bloated union driver pensions. It's one more example of how refreshingly common-sensible I find our state and local government to be - unlike our federal government.
Yesterday my truck's radio was tuned in to my favorite political talk show, and as I jumped out at one of the huge trash collection bins, I couldn't help but notice the caretaker's radio was on the same station. "You have a great job," I kidded him. "You get to just sit around and listen to Rush all day!"
That started our discussion about the current state of political affairs and, of course, the presidential campaign. And it reminded me how ignorant the mainstream media and the political elites of both parties are about the voters' state of mind this time around. It is unfathomable to me that they still underestimate or totally dismiss the level of discontent out here on the street.
The man at the dump is backing Donald Trump all the way, and he defends his position vigorously with facts and figures about the damage illegal immigration is doing to our country. He is furious with the corrupt Republican house and senate leaders and the sheepish representatives who abandoned their conservative promises for fear of retribution. He is pro-life, pro-second amendment, anti-ObamaCare and anti-Iran-agreement.
Just like virtually everybody I meet.
My next-door neighbor is educated, wealthy, and black. He is raising his three beautiful girls with traditional conservative American values: work hard, have respect, be responsible, and don't expect to receive anything you don't earn. He hasn't picked a presidential candidate yet, but is watching the race closely and says he will vote for the most conservative one.
The guy that set up my pool table puts in sixty hour weeks, and he loves it. He enjoys the competition, the financial rewards, and the independence of owning his small business. He just bought a bigger building and will be hiring more people, but government intrusion makes running his business difficult, and the anti-America agenda of the left just makes him mad. "I can't understand these liberals. They waste so much time and money on things that really aren't important, and won't deal with the things that are."
This week I attended Congressman Jeff Duncan's "Faith and Freedom" barbecue event. In addition to some fine barbecued pork, we also got a heaping portion of red meat politics from presidential contenders Governor Scott Walker, Dr. Ben Carson, and Senator Ted Cruz. These guys know what is on the minds of the common folks, 2000 strong, who sang the national anthem with inspiration and harmony. The candidates hit every hot button: Planned Parenthood, ISIS, tax reform, energy independence, ObamaCare, Iran, national debt, corporate cronyism, honesty and values. They know the man and woman on the street are angry at the Republicans they elected and who refuse to represent them.
"If you elect me," Ted Cruz bellowed, "I will always tell the truth, and I will do what I said I would do!"
Trump's supporters unanimously appreciate the way he "tells it like it is." After initially dismissing Trump as a serious candidate, pollster Frank Luntz finally admitted, “Trump is punishment to a Republican elite that wasn’t listening to their grassroots.” Charles Krauthammer insisted in a recent editorial that Trump's nomination would guarantee Hillary Clinton a victory. Then he added, "Yes, I understand. The anger, the frustration, etc., etc., that Trump is channeling. But how are these alleviated by yelling “I’m mad as hell?”
The guy at the dump is mad as hell, and he doesn't know what else to do. Like the rest of us, he studied the issues and voted for people who promised they would be conservatives when they got to Washington. We thought we elected conservative majorities in both houses, but things keep getting worse.
The DC elites need to put down their martini glasses, cut their Martha's Vineyard vacations short, and take a good hard look at the guy on the street. He's angry, and they had better not ignore him any longer.
--------------- Tom Balek is a fellow conservative activist, blogger, musician and contributes to the ARRA News Service. Tom resides in South Carolina and between playing in bands including his family band Caution! Blind Driver, he seeks to educate those too busy with their work and families to notice how close to the precipice our economy has come. He blogs at Rockin' On the Right Side Tags:Guy at the Dump, Is Angry, Tom Balek, Rockin' On The Right Side, Conservatives, Our Economic Mess, South Carolina, Ben Carson, Billy Joel, Donald Trump, Faith and Freedom, Jeff Duncan, presidential campaign, Scott Walker, Ted CruzTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
In the first, I suggested that 75% may be the most important figure in American politics. It is the percentage of Americans who say in the Gallup World Poll that corruption is widespread in government. Given this extraordinary level of contempt for American political and administrative elites, it is no wonder that non-establishment figures like Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Bernie Sanders are gaining such traction in the presidential nominating contests.
In the second, I compared the American view of widespread governmental corruption with the view in other countries. It turns out that 82 countries have a better view of their government, although many of them not by much. For example, at 74%, Brazilians’ dissatisfaction with corruption in their government has led to nationwide protests. But there are many countries where the view of government corruption is far less: Germany (38%), Canada (44%), Australia (41%), and Denmark (19%).
Today I want to offer some historical context for America’s understanding of corruption.
America’s Founding Fathers had a very precise understanding of corruption. As I describe in my book A Nation Like No Other, the Founders used that word less to describe outright criminal behavior than to refer to political acts that corrupt a constitutional system of checks and balances and corrode representative government. They frequently accused the British Parliament of corruption, citing practices such as the crown’s use of “placemen”—members of Parliament who were also granted royal appointments or lucrative pensions by the crown, in exchange for supporting the king’s agenda.
In The Creation of the American Republic, Gordon Wood, a scholar of the American Revolution, explains the Founders’ idea of corruption: “When the American Whigs described the English nation and government as eaten away by “corruption,” they were in fact using a technical term of political science, rooted in the writings of classical antiquity, made famous by Machiavelli, developed by the classical republicans of seventeenth-century England, and carried into the eighteenth century by nearly everyone who laid claim to knowing anything about politics. And for England it was a pervasive corruption, not only dissolving the original political principles by which the constitution was balanced, but, more alarming, sapping the very spirit of the people by which the constitution was ultimately sustained.”The growing sentiment in colonial America was that its mother country was corrupt. Despite the reforms of the Glorious Revolution [of 1688], the crown had still found a way to “corrupt” the supposedly balanced English government. Wood sums it up:“England, the Americans said over and over again, “once the land of liberty—the school of patriots—the nurse of heroes, has become the land of slavery—the school of parricides and the nurse of tyrants.” By the 1770’s the metaphors describing England’s course were all despairing: the nation was fast streaming toward a cataract, hanging on the edge of a precipice; the brightest lamp of liberty in all the world was dimming. Internal decay was the most common image. A poison had entered the nation and was turning the people and the government into “one mass of corruption.” On the eve of the Revolution the belief that England was “sunk in corruption” and “tottering on the brink of destruction” had become entrenched in the minds of disaffected Englishmen on both sides of the Atlantic.”If the Gallup World Poll had been around in the early 1770s, one wonders what percentage of colonial Americans would have said they believed there was widespread corruption in government. Whatever the percentage might have been, we know where colonial America’s disgust with British corruption led: a revolution that replaced a monarchy with a Republic.
The American Founders were determined to create a Republican form of government that would pit special interests against each other so that constitutional outcomes would represent the common good. As Weekly Standard writer Jay Cost writes in his new book, A Republic No More: Big Government and the Rise of American Political Corruption, “[p]olitical corruption is incompatible with a republican form of government. A republic strives above all else to govern for the public interest; corruption, on the other hand, occurs when government agents sacrifice the interests of everybody for the sake of a few.”
Cost is so good at describing the problem of corruption that I wish to quote him at length below. Read his explanation and ask yourself whether Cost is describing your views about corruption and government. “And so we return to one of the earliest metaphors we used to define corruption: it is like cancer or wood rot. It does not stay in one place in the government; it spreads throughout the system. When a faction succeeds in getting what it wants at the expense of the public good, it is only encouraged to push its advantage. By the same token, politicians who aid them and reap rewards for it have an incentive to do it some more, and to improve their methods to maximize their payoffs. Moreover, these successes inspire other politicians and factions to try their hands at raiding the treasury to see if they can do it, too. Thus, a vicious cycle is created that erodes public faith in government, which further contributes to the cycle. When people stop believing that anything can be done to keep the government in line, they stop paying attention carefully or maybe cease participating altogether.
“Ultimately, the public is supposed to be the steward of the government, but how well can it perform that task when it no longer believes doing so is worth its while? How does a democratic government prosper over the long term if the citizenry does not trust the government to represent its interests? How will that not result in anything but the triumph of factionalism over the common good?
“The legitimacy of our government is supposed to derive from the people, and the people alone, who consent to the government because, they believe, it represents their interests. In its ultimate form, corruption eviscerates that sacred notion. The people stop believing that the government represents their interests, and the government in turn begins to operate based upon something other than consent. Put simply, corruption strikes at the heart of our most cherished beliefs and assumptions about republican government. That makes it extremely dangerous to the body politic, regardless of what the Bureau of Economic Analysis says about the rate of GDP growth.”What Jay Cost describes so well about the erosion of the common good is the underlying explanation of why 75% of Americans say that corruption is widespread in government. It also may explain why voters have elected so many governors recently who had no previous experience in government and why voters are seriously looking at presidential candidates with the same outsider status. Perhaps they hope these outsiders can rid us of corruption by being from outside the system.
Our form of government today allows revolution through the ballot box rather than on the battlefield. But nonetheless, the message for our political elites today is much the same as it was in 1776: they ignore the people’s contempt at their own risk.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, Corruption, American FreedomTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Terrorists 'Want to Manipulate' Refugee Program -- Take Action!
by Special Operations Speaks: The U.S. State Department is working with the United Nations to receive tens of thousands of refugees from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
In fact, the United Nations confirmed that the majority those being relocated out of Syria will be sent to cities and towns across the United States.
The worst part of this is the fact that we have little idea of who these people are or what the vetting process is to receive them.
Already, a U.S. Attorney said there's a "terror recruiting problem" amongst refugees in Minnesota -- and Rep. Mike McCaul described the UN-US relocation plan as a “federally funded jihadi pipeline.”
Rep. McCaul also said, "Terrorists have made known they want to manipulate the refugee program to sneak operatives to the West ..."
If the United States is to open its doors for those seeking asylum, Congress must know the process. We can take no chances with those we allow in our borders -- especially when the refugees are coming from hotbeds of Radical Islamic Extremism.
Conservatives are sending an angry unambiguous message to the party. The message can be read not only in the rise of Donald Trump, but also in the rise of Ben Carson. Republican voters are choosing candidates who don’t talk or seem like politicians. They have lost all faith in the Republican Party.
And it’s hard to blame them.
Conservatives poured time, energy and money into a party that promised to counter Obama and take back America. The GOP controls both houses of Congress and conservatives have nothing to show for it.
Support for Trump and Carson really isn’t about the issues. Attacking them for their past liberal positions is a waste of time. This isn’t about what Trump or Carson believe. It’s about what the base believes.
There has been a profound loss of faith in the Republican Party and the larger political establishment orbiting around it. Faced with a bewildering number of candidates, convoluted flip-flopping on the issues (trying to track the immigration positions of most GOP candidates alone requires a flowchart), a great many Republicans are opting out of politics by trying something else.
Trump and Carson have diametrically opposite personalities, but what they bring to the table is a completely different attitude. Their biggest appeal is that they aren’t politicians.
How do you run against that?
Trump’s biggest draw is the fight. Republican voters want a man who won’t pull his punches, won’t back down at the last minute and won’t walk out of the room with his head down and promise to try harder next time. They’ve had too much of that already and they’re sick to death of it.
That was what Ted Cruz understood with the shutdown. It didn’t matter whether it would succeed or fail. Sometimes an army needs to attack to keep up its morale. It can’t wait endlessly or it will fall apart. Cruz understood that Congress could not conduct business as usual while the voters would wait around patiently for them to act. It’s a truth that few of his Senate colleagues were willing to listen to.
This is a truth that many in the establishment busy strategizing indefinite endgames have forgotten. Their concept of victory is fundamentally different than that of the base. Trump is the reckoning. He is the base’s payback for the breach of trust. His poll numbers show the lack of faith in the GOP.
It isn’t necessary to take a specific position on birthright citizenship to compete with him. There’s no real point in taking a political position that much of the base no longer pays attention to because it doesn’t believe that the politicians taking those positions will stick to them once they are elected.
We’re not dealing with think tank checklists here. What voters want is someone with the right attitude, not the right ideology. They’re willing to overlook Trump’s past positions, his flip-flops now, because he has an uncompromising attitude. This is not an ideological purity test; it’s an emotional purity test.
Trying to show them that Trump doesn’t pass an ideological purity test is pointless. Instead Republican candidates have to pass an emotional purity test. They have to show that they’re willing to fight as hard as it takes with nothing held back. They have to stop being politically cautious and get angry.
Because their base is mad as hell.
As David Horowitz wrote in Go for the Heart, "'Caring'” is not one among many issues in an election. It is the central one. Since most policy issues are complicated, voters want to know above everything else just whom they can trust to sort out the complexities and represent them."
Trump has brought that reality home to the Republican Party.
The Republican field suffers from a lack of decisiveness, a lack of forthrightness and a lack of anger. That’s normal for politicians running for public office, but non-threatening personalities and memorized applause lines are not nearly as effective as they used to be. The base trusts passion more than professionalism.
Even before Trump, Republican candidates were advancing not on their merits, but on their willingness to be abrasive, to offend and to tell it like it is. Conservative candidates who want to edge out Trump will need more than a plan. They will need an attitude. And they will need character.
On the other side of the spectrum, Ben Carson passes the emotional purity test by avoiding the slick preparedness of the professional politician. If Trump is running on attitude, Carson is running on character. He speaks softly, he sometimes seems unprepared and his manner is casual. It should doom him, but instead it convinces voters of his integrity. He’s trustworthy because he isn’t a politician.
Carson brings sincerity to the table. In his own way, so does Trump. Both candidates engage emotions. They aren’t running on their records and they sometimes seem unsure what their own positions are.
But what people want is candidates who pass the emotional purity test.
Trump and Carson don’t like to get bogged down in details. They lay out ideas that are both big and simple. That is something that most of the rest of the field has forgotten how to do.
And both of them harness moral outrage. They don’t exist in a universe of policies, but of principles.
That is where Reagan was. That is where the rest of the field needs to be. The issues aren’t details, they’re moral choices. They’re not abstracts, but people’s lives. The obstacles are enemies. Credibility is more about conviction than another ten-point plan that few voters have the time or interest to parse.
Republican voters are looking for passion and character. Candidates who put them first will succeed. They want candidates who are as outraged about the state of things as they are. That desire isn’t limited to Republicans. Bernie Sanders’ rise is being powered by the same sense of frustration and anger.
In a landscape of antiseptic politicians, anger and clumsiness seem authentic. They humanize political candidates. Many conservatives have come to see the GOP as a mindless unfeeling machine, much like the government they are contending with. They want someone to fight that machine for them.
Republican candidates have to stop thinking about positions and start thinking about people. Inspiration has become cheap. The path to it is through principled outrage that creates the hope for political change.
David Horowitz wrote, "Because Democrats regard politics as war conducted by other means, they seek to demonize and destroy their opponents as the enemies of progress, of social justice and minority rights. Republicans can only counter these attacks by turning the Democrats’ guns around — by exposing them as the enforcers of injustice."
Injustice is the key word.
Countless millions of Americans carry the conviction that something is deeply wrong. They sense that their lives, their freedoms and their futures have become precarious. They need more than a plan. They need someone who will express the outrage they feel and fight for them.
One way or another, this election will be a referendum on the Obama years.
Republican voters do not want to be represented in that referendum by another mild-mannered politician who will sell them out and fail to give voice to the outrage at what has been done to them. They want their pain, their anger and their fear for the future to be heard. That is what Trump is doing.
That is the emotional purity test. The primaries are only a rehearsal. The real test will come in a national election when the Republican candidate will face down Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. And all the men and women, the families that helped put him there, that spent their time and energy working to help him, will wait to see if he finally calls out their oppressors for the injustices committed against them.
They waited in vain in 2012. They don’t want to make that mistake again.
If the professional Republican candidates want to be standing there on that day representing them, they had better show them that they can do it now.
------------- Daniel Greenfield is Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a New York writer focusing on radical Islam Tags:: 2016 Election, American Presidency, Ben Carson, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Republican, right, Daniel Greenfield, David Horowitz, Freedom CenterTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
In this space and on my radio show, we pride ourselves on the truth and on setting the record straight when candidates are falsely attacked or mischaracterized (no matter who they are) by the misreporting of the media.
Since Donald Trump is leading in the Republican polls and is being attacked and mischaracterized on many fronts, it probably seems to some as if we are always trying to help people not form a negative perception of The Donald. But I’m not endorsing Donald Trump over the rest of the Republican field so much as I’m looking to make sure the Republican front-runner is assessed on the basis of truth.
That being said, we are used to Democrats using S.I.N. (Shift the subject, Ignore the facts, and Name calling) tactics against Republicans or anyone who dares to disagree with them. But now it’s not only the political and media establishment are doing it to Trump. They’ve also been joined by three well-known conservative writers.
We’ll start with Kathleen Parker, who thinks Trump is a “partisan divider”: But mention PC to a constituency that despises an increasingly alien (PC correction: unfamiliar) country whose core principles are routinely ridiculed by popular culture — and who perceive illegal immigrants (PC correction: undocumented workers) as receiving greater deference than hardworking Americans barely scraping by — and you, my friend, are a hero.I think the real partisan divide is establishment versus non-establishment, instead of Republican versus Democrat. It's PC versus non-PC. It's candidates who stir things up (Trump) vs. those who try to keep things in a calm, appeasing and boring tone (most of the other candidates . . . not all, but most.)
And besides, when was the last time we saw some partisan harmony in the Republican Party or Washington, D.C.? The Republicans are their own worst enemy when it comes to agreeing to a replacement for ObamaCare and a host of other issues that Main Street USA never hears about.
If Trump is divisive at all, he's creating a wedge between those in the political establishment who want PC approaches to issues instead of bold solutions. Do some of Trump's rhetoric and bold ideas offend some people? Yes! But most of the offended ones are those in the political and media establishment. Most of Main Street USA are not offended.
Do some of his ideas need refining for implementation? Yes! But it's not necessary to try to drive him out of the presidential race by driving a negative perception of him through the narrow lens of the media.
Next comes Charles Krauthammer, who thinks Trump’s immigration proposals are of the crackpot variety: He is an affront to anyone devoted to the project William F. Buckley began six decades ago with the founding in 1955 of the National Review — making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable. Buckley’s legacy is being betrayed by invertebrate conservatives now saying that although Trump “goes too far,” he has “tapped into something,” and therefore. . . .
Therefore what? This stance — if a semi-grovel can be dignified as a stance — is a recipe for deserved disaster. Remember, Henry Wallace and Strom Thurmond “tapped into” things.I have met George Will and admire a lot of his thoughts on various subjects. And George is a consistent conservative's conservative. But I think George missed the memo that the Republican brand has an image problem. And whatever an authentic Republican looks like, we need to have them run for president and win!
Leroy and Bessie from Main Street USA couldn’t care less about a counterfeit or authentic Republican. Trump has tapped into their anger and frustration and it's not a temporary phenomenon.
Bottom line: Trying to discourage Trump supporters from supporting Trump with name calling will not work because they don't follow the latest conservative opinions from well-known conservative writers.
So if conservatives think Trump's tough talk is wrong or unworkable in the political sphere, then explain why instead of resorting to assuming they can't be done because of establishment resistance, and then resorting to name calling. That's what liberals do!
Main Street USA is sick and tired of assuming something can't be done, because they see nothing is getting done on our big challenges – economic growth, the tax code, spending, immigration, military strength and a clear foreign policy strategy.
While I was out of town taking a few days off from the radio show, everybody I talked to wanted to talk about Donald Trump. Most men said they liked him, and most women said they did not like him. Now that's something to explore as to why, rather than name calling.
One women commented to me, unsolicited, that she loves Hillary and Trump is "crazy".
I expect that from a true delusional liberal, but not from conservatives.
------------ Herman Cain is a conservative radio host of CainTV, a 2012 GOP presidential primary candidate with over 40 years of experience in the private sector as an analyst for Coca-Cola, an executive at Pillsbury, a regional Vice President for Burger King, and CEO of Godfather's Pizza. Cain served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City and a supervisory mathematician for the Dept. of the Navy. Tags:Herman Cain, conservative commentator, CainTV, Donald Trump. conservative media, resorts to name-calling To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Hillary Clinton, doesn't like, anchor baby, okay with, Unviable Tissue Mass, Editorial Cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Dems Holding Congress HOSTAGE To Increase Spending
by Phil Kerpen, Contributing Author: September is going to be an unbelievably busy – and dangerous – month in Washington, which is why last week we asked you to tell us what our top priorities should be. The results were crystal clear: after protecting the Constitution, limiting government spending was your number one concern.
It makes sense. A return to totally uncontrolled federal spending would mean billions more of your tax dollars flowing into every federal agency to cause untold mischief in the economy, our families, and our lives.
Democrats in Congress, led by Harry Reid, are dead-set on shutting down the government if they can’t gut the spending caps in the Budget Control Act, the historic agreement capping discretionary spending that they themselves agreed to and President Obama signed in 2011, and go back to runaway federal spending.
But even though Reid is demanding a shut down over spending, you can bet the liberal media will try to blame Republicans, strengthening Reid’s hand. We must fight back.
That’s why it’s extremely important for you to take a moment and to take action to demand Congress save the spending caps.
The Budget Control Act is working, dropping government spending as a percentage of GDP from an Obama-stimulus - driven peak of 24.4 percent to a more historically normal – but still too high – 20.3 percent. Now is a time to advance, not retreat, on spending restraint because rapidly growing entitlements are set to swamp this improvement in discretionary spending.
We can’t believe that Democrats want to shut down the government if they can’t spend more money than they themselves agreed to on the EPA, the IRS, HHS, and all the rest of the vast, wasteful federal bureaucracies. They cannot be allowed to succeed.
We look forward to having you on our side this month during a lot of important fights and we hope that together we can keep making a difference on the issues you find truly important.
------------------ Phil Kerpen is president of American Commitment. Follow him at (@kerpen) and on Facebook. He is a contributing author at the ARRA News Service. Tags:Phil Kerpen, American Commitment, Democrats, Congress, hostage, increase spending, take action, save the spending caps, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: “One thing that we’ve done,” Dennis McBride of Support our Schools-Wauwatosa told a crowd at a free event hosted by the non-profit Wisconsin Public Education Network, “is we’ve made sure every time one of our legislators pops up his or her head above the foxhole, we’re there to shoot at them.”
The crowd laughed, reports the watchdog John K. MacIver Institute, which ran the story under the headline, “Panelist Jokes About Shooting Legislators at Public Education Summit.”
No worries, though: it was just a metaphor.
The genuinely kooky thoughts were less figurative.
One speaker encouraged the audience never to say the two words, “Scott Walker,” for fear of giving “the Wisconsin governor” higher name-recognition.
“Some of the first voucher supporters,” asserted Jonas Persson of the Center for Media and Democracy, “outside of this kind of new right core group of ideologues and wealthy entrepreneurs, were white supremacists. . . .”
Incredibly, he insisted that this movement “drew most of its support from, quote, ‘white flight Aryans.’”
“The ultimate goal is about breaking down public schools and to be honest with you,” said Jennifer Epps-Addison of Wisconsin Jobs Now/Schools and Communities United, “it’s about profiting off of the education of our kids.”
Heavens! Making a profit by serving parents and children “consuming” education? Unthinkable.
Meanwhile, Epps-Addison pushed the “Wisconsin Freedom Compact,” which calls for doubling the tax dollars going to public education.
Will she guarantee that no one will profit from that?
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------ Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service. Tags:Paul Jacob, Common Sense, money for us good, profit bad, Wisconsin Public Education Network, teacher's union, doubling tax dollars, public educationTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
The AP initially responded by saying it published an abbreviated version of Jahn's article for space reasons and reissued the full text of Jahn's original story. Late yesterday, the AP went one step further by posting the below transcript of the side deal.Separate arrangement II agreed by the Islamic State of Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency on 11 July 2015, regarding the Road-map, Paragraph 5
Iran and the Agency agreed on the following sequential arrangement with regard to the Parchin issue:
1. Iran will provide to the Agency photos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.
2. Iran will provide to the Agency videos of the locations, including those identified in paragraph 3 below, which would be mutually agreed between Iran and the Agency, taking into account military concerns.
3. Iran will provide to the Agency 7 environmental samples taken from points inside one building already identified by the Agency and agreed by Iran, and 2 points outside of the Parchin complex which would be agreed between Iran and the Agency.
4. The Agency will ensure the technical authenticity of the activities referred to in paragraphs 1-3 above. Activities will be carried out using Iran's authenticated equipment, consistent with technical specifications provided by the Agency, and the Agency's containers and seals.
5. The above mentioned measures would be followed, as a courtesy by Iran, by a public visit of the Director General, as a dignitary guest of the Government of Iran, accompanied by his deputy for safeguards.
6. Iran and the Agency will organize a one-day technical roundtable on issues relevant to Parchin.
For the International Atomic Energy Agency: Tero Varjoranta, Deputy Director General for Safeguards.
For the Islamic Republic of Iran: Ali Hoseini Tash, Deputy Secretary of Supreme National Security Council for Strategic Affairs.The AP explained it was not allowed to have a copy of this side deal but was permitted to transcribe the entire text. AP said two officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that this text does not differ from the final version agreed to between Iran and the IAEA.
Some reactions to the release of the text of the side deal:
First, the Associated Press deserves credit for taking this step to validate Jahn's article. I assume there was strong pressure on the AP from the Obama administration and the IAEA to drop this story.
Second, the side-deal text confirms all the major points in Jahn's article: Iran will collect samples at the Parchin military base, Iran will provide the IAEA with photos and videos of locations at Parchin, and it will use its own collection equipment authenticated by the IAEA.
Third, there is one minor factual difference between Jahn's story and the side deal text: his article said no areas outside of a Parchin building would be sampled; the side-deal text says samples will be collected from two areas outside the building agreed to by Iran and the IAEA. I'm not troubled by this since Jahn apparently took notes on the side deal document but did not transcribe its full text.
Fourth, the text released by the IAEA only addresses Parchin, but Jahn said Iranians would collect samples for the IAEA at other sites as well. I assume Jahn wrote this based on congressional hearings on the Iran deal held last month.
Fifth, the Jahn story did not mention that IAEA Director General Amano and his Deputy for Safeguards will visit Parchin as a "dignitary guest" or that Iran and the IAEA will arrange a "one-day technical roundtable on issues relevant to Parchin." These details are significant because they have nothing to do with the objective collection of samples at Parchin and appear to be public-relations stunts to close the IAEA's file on Parchin.
The AP probably released the text of the side deal in response to an effort by supporters of the Iran nuclear agreement to discredit Jahn's story by claiming it was revised because of inaccuracies and exaggerations. The text of the side deal confirms Jahn's article and my Corner follow-up on it yesterday; it indicates a "preposterous and unserious plan to investigate past and ongoing Iranian nuclear-weapons-related activities."
-------------- Fred Fleitz writes for the Center for Security Policy. Family Security Matters informs Americans about the issues surrounding national security . . . to increase civic participation and political responsibility; and to empower all Americans to become proactive defenders of our national security and community safety. Tags:Iran Nuke Agreement, secret, side deal, AP, Fred Fleitz, Family Security Matters, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
#Conservative #Constitution #NRA #GunRights #military 22 yr #veteran #professor #Christian #ProLife #TCOT #SGP #CCOT #schoolchoice #fairtax Married-50+yrs #MAGA
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting the beliefs associated with the ARRA, this blog/site is not controlled by nor funded by the ARRA. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.