Mediaboss Marketing

Republicans remain resolutely opposed to the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, which prevented Iran from building a nuclear weapon in exchange for economic relief.

But for a political party that claims an unshakeable commitment to Israels security, the GOP would be wise to consider how Israels top spies men who have dedicated their lives to defending Israel from foreign threats view the deal.

Indeed, of the six living former directors of Israels storied foreign intelligence agency, four have publicly praised the Iran nuclear agreement. None have echoed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuBenjamin (Bibi) NetanyahuMOREs extraordinary criticism of the deal.

These former high-level intelligence officials are not alone. Israels military leadership, high-profile Israeli nuclear experts, former directors of Israels internal security agency and a former Israeli prime minister have all echoed Mossads former chiefs in praising the Iran nuclear deal.

Shabtai Shavit, Mossads director from 1989 to 1996, hailed the agreement as an opportunity for Israel to join a new Middle Eastern order. According to Shavit, the agreement bought us 15 years, in which all kinds of things could happen. Now, with Trump having withdrawn from the agreement, the Iranians have enough enriched uranium for at least one bomb.

Danny Yatom, Mossads chief from 1996 to 1998, called President TrumpDonald TrumpThe Hill's Morning Report - Biden: Back to the future on immigration, Afghanistan, Iran Juan Williams: Biden flips the script The Memo: Two months in, strong Biden faces steep climbs MOREs unilateral withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal a mistake, arguing that remaining in the deal made it easier to persuade Iran to make much more concessions.

Efraim Halevy, who led Mossad from 1998 to 2002, declared that the Obama administration scored a great success with the Iran nuclear deal, applauding the agreements rigorous monitoring system. In Halevys words, the deal blocks the road to Iranian nuclear military capabilities for at least a decade.

While Republicans continue to demand that negotiations over Irans nuclear program expand to include Tehrans malign behavior, Halevy flatly rejected such a maximalist approach. According to Halevy, the Iranians would ... have built a nuclear arsenal by the time non-nuclear issues such as Irans support for regional militant groups and its missile program were hashed out.

A fourth former Mossad director, Tamir Pardo, signed a letter in support of President BidenJoe BidenAstraZeneca says COVID-19 vaccine found 79 percent effective in US trial with no safety concerns The Hill's Morning Report - Biden: Back to the future on immigration, Afghanistan, Iran This week: Senate works to confirm Biden picks ahead of break MOREs approach to Iran. Pardo, along with several high-profile Israeli security experts, welcomes the American initiative to get Iran to again transparently follow the guidelines in the [nuclear agreement].

Pro-deal sentiment among Israels spies is not limited to Mossad directors. In an explosive interview, the agencys recently-retired deputy director an apolitical and widely respected intelligence official whose identity remains concealed for security reasons blasted Netanyahus relentless efforts to undermine the agreement.

According to this former senior official, Israels situation today is worse than it was at the time of the nuclear deal. We have a situation in which there is uranium enrichment in Fordow, there is activity in Kashan, there is work at Natanz, [Iran has] accumulated 2.5 tons of enriched uranium, and now advanced centrifuges.

Echoing former Mossad director Efraim Halevy, the unnamed official slammed Netanyahus demands parroted by congressional Republicans that negotiations with Tehran should expand to include non-nuclear issues. Such a maximalist approach, Mossads former deputy chief argues, endangers Israel by muddying the waters and distracting from what he views as the one true existential threat to Israel: an Iranian nuclear weapon.

The former spy also blasted Netanyahus complete opposition to the Obama administrations efforts to rein in Irans nuclear program. In his telling, Netanyahus relentless obstruction obliterated Israels capacity to shape the agreement.

Ami Ayalon, a former director of Shin Bet Israels internal intelligence and security agency agrees with his Mossad counterparts. According to Ayalon, when it comes to Irans nuclear capability, this [deal] is the best option. When negotiations began, Iran was two months away from acquiring enough material for a [nuclear] bomb. [With the agreement in place,] it will be 12 months.

Another former Shin Bet chief, Carmi Gillon, penned one of the more impassioned defenses of the Iran nuclear agreement. Writing in 2017, Gillon urged then-President Trump not to withdraw from the deal, calling it a blessing for Israel and a clear success.

According to Gillon, two years on from the signing of the agreement to curtail Tehrans nuclear program, Israel and the region are safer than ever because the threat of an Iranian nuclear weapon is more remote than it has been in decades. Thanks to the agreement, Irans nuclear program has been defanged and all its pathways to a bomb blocked.

Perhaps most importantly, Gillon wrote that the majority of my colleagues in the Israeli military and intelligence communities supported the deal once it was reached.

Gillons claim of broad support for the agreement among Israels national security experts is echoed by Uzi Arad, a former high-ranking Mossad official who served as Netanyahus national security adviser from 2009 to 2011. According to Arad, the majority of Israels national security community favors the deal.

Indeed, support for the agreement extends to Israels military leadership. Asked whether senior military officers viewed the Iran nuclear deal as good for Israel, Yair Golan, Israels second highest ranking military officer from 2014 to 2017, responded with a simple answer: Unequivocally.

According to Golan, the general sentiment in the senior ranks [of the Israeli military] was one of satisfaction [with the Iran nuclear agreement]. In Golans telling, it is in Israels urgent national security interest for the United States to return to compliance with the deal.

Indeed, support for the agreement among Israels top generals should come as no surprise, as the calm on the Iranian nuclear front allowed the military to focus on other threats.

Ultimately, Netanyahus hard-line approach to Iran is at stark odds with the consensus of Israels intelligence, foreign policy and military experts. Indeed, in a scathing op-ed, former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert labeled Netanyahus maximalist campaign Israels greatest failure.

Of course, this is not the first time Netanyahu finds himself on the wrong side of a critical security issue. Testifying before Congress in 2002, Netanyahu made a bold personal guarantee that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would have enormous positive reverberations on the region.

Israels spies surely disagreed with Netanyahus catastrophically wrong judgment then, as they do now. Republicans should take note.

Marik von Rennenkampff served as an analyst with the U.S. Department of States Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, as well as an Obama administration appointee at the U.S. Department of Defense. Follow him on Twitter @MvonRen.

Read the original here:
Republicans should listen to Israel's spies on the Iran nuclear deal | TheHill - The Hill

McCarthy also urged Republicans to be unified on party messaging. He called attention to GOP efforts to spotlight the growing crisis at the southern border, where a wave of unaccompanied migrant children has crested since the start of the Biden administration.

Sources say that during Wednesday's GOP meeting, Biggs responded that some members have been visiting the border for years and didnt just show up there recently a not-so-subtle dig at McCarthy, who led a GOP delegation to the border earlier this week.

I didnt think anything was heated. People are passionate, Biggs said after the meeting, though he declined to discuss what happened inside. If we wont use every procedural tool in the toolbox we have yes, that frustrates me.

Biggs added that, as a member of the minority party, Youve got to get in the way and try to slow things down as much as you possibly can.

Youve got to get in the way and try to slow things down as much as you possibly can.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.)

In recent weeks, a small slice of rebellious Republicans have been requesting recorded House votes on non-controversial bills and forcing votes on motions to adjourn, causing headaches for their colleagues and scrambling the floor schedules as members are forced to drop everything to make it to the floor. Those Republicans say they're reflecting broad frustration with how Democrats are running the House, from the lack of GOP amendment opportunities to the razor-wire fences erected around the Capitol.

The ongoing dispute over floor procedures is a wonky but critical one for House leaders of both parties. If GOP lawmakers refuse to relent in their delay tactics, it would mean a slog of roll-call votes on the most mundane of issues forcing lawmakers into a new way of life where half of their days are spent shuffling on and off the House floor.

Rank-and-file members said they increasingly fear that the House schedule will devolve into chaos, with Democrats struggling to keep proceedings orderly as GOP lawmakers seek to disrupt the day on a whim.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told Democrats during a caucus-wide call on Wednesday that he is working closely with McCarthy to resolve the issue. Hoyer said Democrats would deploy some kind of formal effort to halt the GOP tactics when the House returns after its upcoming recess.

"By the time we come back in April, we will have resolved the [Republican] obstruction via negotiation or by a change to the rules, Hoyer said, according to people on the call.

Senior Democrats say its not clear exactly what a rules change might look like, or whether it would actually work to prevent House Republicans from forcing votes on every single noncontroversial bill.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said that the delaying tactics could actually prove counterproductive by resulting in fewer GOP bills getting passed. | J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo

House Rules Chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said he's discussed the issue with both Hoyer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and will try to "find the best way forward" in the next few weeks.

"Without getting into the details, there are options. But heres the deal: Itd be nice if the minority leader would tell some of his members to behave like grown-ups," McGovern said.

"This is serious work were doing. These are serious debates were having. And most complaints Im getting, quite frankly, are from Republicans. Because theyre annoyed."

And many Democrats, as well as a growing number of Republicans, worry that GOP hardliners are showing no signs of backing down anytime soon.

When asked if he intends to plow ahead with the strategy, Biggs responded: Yeah. You have to keep pushing and trying like a son of a gun to slow them down.

Frustration with the slowdowns has mounted for weeks, after an already grueling month of House votes was made worse for members by GOP delay tactics. Because of the pandemic, every vote takes about 45 minutes or longer, so a few additional roll-call votes can drag out each days floor time by hours often late into the night.

Its not just a dispute over process holding things up. Several conservatives have substantive complaints about some of the bipartisan bills that were scheduled for speedy floor votes including legislation to award congressional gold medals to the Capitol Police for their service during the Jan. 6 riot.

Some Republicans are unhappy with language in the gold medals bill that calls the Capitol the temple of our American Democracy and labels the attackers as a mob of insurrectionists.

These words all matter, right? Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) told POLITICO. We are looking at it, we will figure it out I have to study the language fully.

Roy said a few others in the ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus feel the same way he does, while noting that there are a wide variety of opinions on the issue.

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) is now circulating a competing bill to honor the Capitol Police that doesnt mention the Capitol attack or Jan. 6, according to a copy obtained by POLITICO.

We mourn the losses of Capitol Police Officers Brian Sicknick and Howard Liebengood, and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Jeffrey Smith, who all passed in January 2021, a draft of the bill reads, naming officers whose deaths are connected to the riot. The sacrifices made by each of these men are never forgotten in the U.S. Congress and by the many individuals who benefit from their service.

The spat is threatening to turn even one of the most non-controversial issues Congress will face this year honoring its police force into a partisan slugfest.

Our whole goal is to take back the House. And you need a good strategy to do it, said Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.). The leaders made a plan that he thinks will get us there. And so you dont want to have 10, 15 different people doing their own plan. ... So I agree with the leader.

Read the original:
Behave like grown-ups: Conservative rebellion boils over in House - POLITICO

Republicans are going to have to explain to their constituents who have bills to pay and children to feed why they voted against helping them out, Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison told reporters this week. Voters will never forget who stood up for them during this unprecedented time and who stood in the way.

But Republicans, who traditionally would be expected to gain seats in the midterms as the opposition party, insist they are not sweating it. They are mounting their own campaign to brand the bill as a partisan giveaway laden with Democratic priorities that are unrelated to the pandemic, and are using their own unanimous opposition to the bill as proof that COVID aid, which was supported by both parties under Donald Trump, is partisan.

Spending $2 trillion on a party line vote is not going to be popular, predicted Republican strategist Michael Steel, who was a top aide to former House speaker John Boehner.

But if that prediction is going to come to pass, Republicans have a lot of work to do. A recent Pew poll found that 70 percent of Americans favor the bill, including 41 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents. Just 42 percent of Americans said they believe Republicans are making a good faith effort to work with Biden on the bill. One poll from the left-leaning firm Public Policy Polling found that more Americans wanted the relief bill than a new puppy.

That popularity opens up an opportunity for Democrats to paint Republicans as uncaring about the needs of everyday Americans during a pandemic.

The rescue plan is literally more popular than puppies, Democratic strategist Jesse Ferguson said. People want this plan more than they want a puppy and Republicans just voted against it.

Democrats also note that their party picked up two Senate seats in traditionally red Georgia in January after the GOP-controlled Senate scaled down the size of relief checks in the last COVID aid bill painting a potentially ominous picture for Republicans after this move.

What are they going to say? The $1,400 check is too big? said Mark Longabaugh, a former top aide to Senator Bernie Sanders, about the Republicans midterm message. That aint going anywhere.

In Congress, Democrats have warned Republicans not to try to take credit for the latest rescue bill in the future.

I hope that we dont see some of my Republican friends show up at announcements announcing money and resources for schools and cities . . . trying to take credit for something theyve voted against, Representative Jim McGovern of Worcester said during House debate on the bill Tuesday.

If Republicans dont seem nervous, its because they say theyve heard this song before in 2009, when the GOP largely stood together to vote against a $787 billion stimulus bill negotiated by Biden, then the vice president, at the nadir of the Great Recession. Democrats predicted Republicans would suffer for their obstruction, but instead, the party made historic gains in the 2010 midterms, buoyed by anger over the Affordable Care Act, which passed in early 2010.

In 2010 Id be on TV with [DNC spokesman] Brad Woodhouse and hed say, Not a damn Republican voted for this bill and theyre going to lose, recalled Doug Heye, a Republican National Committee spokesman at the time. And Id be like, OK, Brad, I think were going to have a good year.

Biden and other Democrats appear haunted by the aftermath of that stimulus, and the president has been pressing Democrats to aggressively sell the benefits of the bill.

We didnt adequately explain what we had done. Barack [Obama] was so modest, Biden told House Democrats at their virtual conference last week. I kept saying, Tell people what we did. He said, We dont have time. Im not going to take a victory lap. And we paid a price for it, ironically, for that humility.

On Tuesday, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the president would likely travel around the country to tout the bill.

We certainly recognize that we cant just sign a bill again, Psaki said. Were not taking anything for granted.

But the White House is passing on one key way to sell the bill putting Bidens name on the checks that will reach Americans. Trump ensured his name was on the memo line of checks the Treasury Department distributed; Biden will not be doing the same.

This is not about him; this is about the American people getting relief almost 160 million of them, Psaki said.

Democrats believe that several factors are different now than in 2009 and 2010, when Republicans did not pay a political price.

For one, Democrats have such narrow congressional majorities its unlikely they will squeeze through another major piece of legislation like the health care bill, which rallied the GOP last time. The COVID aid bill also includes direct cash relief, unlike the tax credits of the 2009 stimulus, which Americans might not have even realized they received. And finally, Republicans do not appear to be putting forward alternative solutions to COVID relief, instead changing the subject to culture war issues, which Democrats believe voters will see as a cop-out.

The Republican Party doesnt stand for anything right now, said Ian Russell, a Democratic strategist and former political director for the House Democrats campaign arm. They spent last week talking about Dr. Seuss and Mr. Potato Head. Its tougher for them when the American people need help and theyre just saying no.

But in the end, Republicans will still go into the midterms with several structural advantages as a party.

Democrats weakness in rural areas and gerrymandering of congressional district boundaries give Republicans an edge in the House. The Senates Republicans also represent 42 million fewer Americans than the Senates Democrats despite the chamber being evenly divided between the two parties, according to a calculation by Vox. That means congressional Republicans need to convince fewer voters to back them to have the same political power as their Democratic colleagues, lessening the risk of spurning popular policies.

The midterm elections are also nearly two years away, which leaves plenty of time for new crises to reshape the political environment and potentially erase the COVID aid bill from voters memories.

Good luck on making any predictions on anything happening in America in 20 months, Heye said.

Liz Goodwin can be reached at elizabeth.goodwin@globe.com. Follow her on Twitter @lizcgoodwin.

Read this article:
Zero Republicans voted for the COVID relief bill. Will that haunt them in the midterms? - The Boston Globe

Gonzales says he wants to make sure border communities, immigration agencies have resources to deal with increased unauthorized migration

by: Julian Resendiz

US Border Patrol vehicles are pictured near the Paso Del Norte International Bridge at the US-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, on September 12, 2019. The US Supreme Court on September 11, 2019, allowed asylum restrictions by President Donald Trumps administration to take effect, preventing most Central American migrants from applying at the US border. (Photo by Paul Ratje / AFP) (Photo credit should read PAUL RATJE/AFP via Getty Images)

EL PASO, Texas (Border Report) The 26 Republicans in the House Appropriations Committee are asking their Democratic chair to hold hearings on an immigration problem they say is reaching crisis proportions at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Illegal border crossings have skyrocketed this past month and are set to exceed the record-breaking numbers we saw in 2019, the Republicans said in a letter sent Wednesday to U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Connecticut. In light of these alarming figures we respectfully request the (committee) hold hearings on the ongoing security and humanitarian crisis at our southern border.

The acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection earlier Wednesday released enforcement data showing more undocumented migrants were stopped at the border in February than in any month going back to June 2019.

The Republicans say that on Tuesday alone the Border Patrol and Army National Guard members run into 5,204 migrants, bringing the total for this fiscal year to more than 200,000.

Over the last two years, Congress and the previous administration passed legislation to strengthen our border and provide the resources needed to assist agencies with the surge of migrants. We are eager to continue working together to gather the facts about the current situation on the border and develop solutions to address this crisis, the Republicans said.

U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, who represents a large West Texas district that includes Culberson, Hudspeth and East El Paso County, said he recently visited a shelter for unaccompanied minors in Carrizo Springs and inspected a stretch of border near Eagle Pass.

Every week I see firsthand the problems caused by the lack of resources at the border. Our communities are hurting, and I plan to use my position on the Appropriations Committee to ensure we are utilizing all of our resources to combat the ongoing crisis at our southern border, Gonzales said.

Gonzales, New Mexico Republican Yvette Herrell and Arlingtons U.S. Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, were scheduled to give more details on the proposed hearings during a live teleconference from Washington, D.C.

To watch the 9:30 a.m. (Eastern Time) event, follow this link:https://www.republicanleader.gov/live/

Visit theBorderReport.com homepagefor the latest exclusive stories and breaking news about issues along the United States-Mexico border.

Excerpt from:
Republicans want to hold hearings on immigration crisis on the border - KTSM 9 News

And so it begins. A dozen Republican attorneys general have filed a legal challenge apparently the first of many expected group efforts over President Joe Biden's executive order restoring an Obama administration directive that federal agencies estimate the social costs of carbon emissions when devising policies.

Taking such costs into account is just common sense when trying to understand the connections between federal actions and climate change, so of course President Donald Trump ended it. Biden brought it back, and now Republican attorneys general want the courts to rule that doing so somehow violates the separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch.

Maybe if they didn't have their heads so deeply buried in the tar sands they'd recognize that pursuing policies that fail to reduce carbon emissions imperils people in red states just as much as anywhere else.

"Setting the 'social cost' of greenhouse gases is an inherently speculative, policy-laden, and indeterminate task, which involves attempting to predict such unknowable contingencies as future human migrations, international conflicts, and global catastrophes for hundreds of years into the future," the lawsuit argues.

Whether their legal argument has any legs is doubtful.

"My immediate reaction is that these states should have a very hard time convincing a judge that a President asking his agencies to work together, to engage with the public and stakeholders, and then to follow the best available science and economics to evaluate the consequences of their decisions, is somehow illegal," Jason A. Schwartz, legal director of the Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University, told Bloomberg Law.

The reality is that global warming is happening, and human activity is driving it. We will spend "hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars" whether we abandon fossil fuels and convert the vast majority of the world's energy production to renewable sources, or if we just shrug our shoulders and forge ahead with emissions that are raising sea levels (which will drown billions of dollars worth of coastal development), increasing both floods and droughts, and feeding bigger, stronger hurricanes and other major storm systems.

Yes, the transition to renewable energy will cost jobs in the oil-and-gas sector but it will also create new ones in the renewable energy sector, something some industry leaders recognize as they try (sometimes under government pressure) to position themselves less as oil-and-gas companies than as energy companies.

Also, China already is casting a clearer eye on the future than the U.S., despite Republicans' oft-expressed concerns about maintaining the vitality of American industry and leading the global transition. If the U.S. doesn't get its act together, it will cede the turf to a major economic rival, forgoing the chance to forge a stronger and sustainable energy sector, and economy, while clinging Trumpishly to the energy policies that got us into such straits in the first place.

Of course the Republican attorneys general have every right to turn to the courts to challenge policies they believe violate laws and damage their states and constituencies. Blue states did that very thing, with California Attorney General Xavier Becerra involved in 110 such challenges himself.

But constituents of those Republican attorneys general would be wise to look closely at the risks they are taking, and remember that voters were the ones who elected these would-be saviors in the first place.

The Los Angeles Times

Read the original:
Martelle: Republicans are still sticking their heads in the tar sands on climate change - Chattanooga Times Free Press