WE’RE IN THE VERY BEST OF HANDS: Obama Never Once Met With His Defense Intelligence Chief

President Barack Obama twice appointed former Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn to key national security jobs in his administration, including as deputy director of national intelligence and later as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, yet he never once met with Flynn face to face.

The general, who spent 33 years in the intelligence field, told The Daily Caller News Foundation he was never called in for a face-to-face meeting with Obama to offer his assessment of ISIS as it rampaged through the Middle East, or during the political meltdown of Libya and Egypt, or on Iran’s efforts to build a nuclear bomb, or of the “Russian reset” that ended in shambles.

In four years, Flynn was never invited to brief the president on any kind of intelligence issue. Ever.

“Here is the crux of my relationship with Obama,” Flynn told TheDCNF in a wide ranging interview Tuesday. “Here I am, running one of the largest intelligence agencies in the world. He appoints me twice — one as the assistant director of national intelligence and one as the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. I’m also his senior intelligence officer. And I had almost five years in combat.”

He paused, then said, “I never met with him once.”
“He’s a kind of a funny guy when it comes to relationships,” Flynn told TheDCNF. “He’s very aloof and very distant. I wasn’t on his screen at all. I wasn’t on his radar which is really sad. It’s amazing.”

Now in a turn of tables, Flynn is advising presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and is widely reported as being on the short list to run as Trump’s vice president.

Unlike Obama, Trump has not only met with Flynn but has also spent hours listening to Flynn’s views.

Flynn’s characteristic answers are candid and direct. On the possible choice as Trump’s vice presidential running mate: “This is an honor to be considered at this level and this mix of talent. The fact that my name is being bantered around in the small group of people for this very distinguished office is something I would give serious consideration to.”

He added that “I have said I want to continue to serve this country in any capacity.”

Like Trump, Flynn is an unconventional figure who abhors political correctness.

He has just published his first book after he was unceremoniously fired by Obama in 2014 for delivering a pessimistic assessment of ISIS before Congress. The presentation went directly against the president’s prediction that ISIS was irrelevant — a “JV team.”

Flynn could have written the typical Washington “Tell All” insider’s book about the Obama administration. Instead, he teamed up with Iran and Middle East expert Michael Ledeen in writing a serious book about the threat of Islamic terrorism titled, “The Field of Flight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and Its Allies.”

Flynn says he is impressed with Trump. “I have met him. We sat down and talked in his offices in New York. The first time was quite a while ago. I’ve been in touch with him and his inner circle since last September,” he told TheDCNF.

“He is very, very serious about the future of this county. He is a great listener. I felt we had a great discussion about the world.”

At the first meeting, “he sort of threw out a couple of questions to me, which I felt were very telling of his insight and his knowledge.”

Then, Flynn said the two of them “walked around the world for about an hour and a half, sort of discussing back and forth.”

Flynn described Trump as “very refreshing.” The presidential candidate “really thought deeply about the issues of America and its relationships around the world. And also about America,” he said.

“My impression — and I have been around many good leaders in my career — and I found him to be a very strong, dynamic leader. And I think that’s why he is so attractive to so many people in this country right now.”

“Trump has a bigger, longer-term vision for this country than just sitting as a President for four years. He really does. And that’s what I was impressed by,” Flynn told TheDCNF.

Flynn is less charitable toward former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, one of his colleagues in the Obama administration.

“She is somebody that you get the impression that she’s got some other hidden agenda,” he said. “I always felt where there were interactions, there is some other hidden agenda there that doesn’t necessarily have the best interest of the country. Something else is going on.”

He pointed to Clinton’s “Russian reset” as one of her biggest failures. The reset was an initiative from Clinton in an effort to restore positive relations with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.

“The Russian reset was a complete failure. That was her sort of baby. She lacked the understanding of how Russia deals on the global stage and how Russia deals with people, personalities and also on nation-on nation, and the way they see us,” Flynn said.

“She went into it with a level of arrogance and a lack of understanding.”

Unlike some skeptics in Washington, though, Flynn thought at the time that a Russian “reset” could work. “That Russian reset actually could have turned into something that resulted in some sort of mutual respect. But in fact under her leadership, it completely collapsed.”

He also is blunt about corruption and the Clinton Foundation: “The public corruption between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department may never be discovered. Or it may be discovered well past the election. But it’s a very real issue.”

Flynn challenged the foundation’s acceptance of $100 million in contributions from Persian Gulf Sheiks.

“The fact she takes one dollar from Saudi Arabia as any kind of a donation is a disgrace,” Flynn said. “Any of these countries destroys women’s rights. And then she stands there and claims that she’s for women.”

Hillary Clinton “should give back every red penny that she gets from those guys,” Flynn said. “Then she can talk about women’s rights.” (For more from the author of “WE’RE IN THE VERY BEST OF HANDS: Obama Never Once Met With His Defense Intelligence Chief” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Atrocity Known as Moral Equivalence

We have reached the point where moral equivalence has become a moral atrocity. The smart set in the West has insisted, for over a generation, that Israel and the Palestinians are morally equal. There are extremists, on both sides, they say. Both sides are responsible for the absence of peace.

The first serious outcry against this lie came immediately after the Palestinians began there terror war against Israel in September 2000.

That war, incited, directed, funded, commanded and celebrated by Yassir Arafat and his henchmen, including his successor Mahmoud Abbas, began two months after Arafat overturned the table at Camp David in response to then prime minister Ehud Barak’s offer to withdraw from 95 percent of Judea and Samaria, all of Gaza and half of Jerusalem to enable the establishment of an independent state of Palestine in the areas.

The areas in question, Barak said, would be handed over to the PLO Jew free. The hundreds of thousands of Jews living in the areas set to become Palestine, would be forcefully evicted from their homes to ensure that the delicate, sensitive Palestinians, wouldn’t be troubled by the Jews with their “dirty feet,” in the words of Abbas.

That, of course, wasn’t enough for Arafat. And it was insufficient not because Barak failed to give him what he demanded. It was insufficient because his demands were insatiable. Arafat was never interested in peace. As his deputy Faisal Husseini said at the time, the peace process was a “Trojan Horse.”

Its purpose was to get the PLO bases of operation inside of Israeli territory in order to expand its ability to destroy the Jewish state. This is the reason that despite the fact that the international community has given them more financial assistance than any other people in the history of humanity, the Palestinians have not built a society. They have received tens of billions of dollars in development aid and failed to develop an operating economy.

This failure isn’t due to incompetence or corruption. It is simply that the Palestinians don’t want those things. They chose not to develop independent institutions. They do not want to build a state.

They have spent the money to transform Palestinian society into the most anti-Semitic society in the world where the vast majority of its people want to kill Jews and destroy Israel.

They have transformed Palestinian society into a place where Jews have no right to live – not because of some sort of occupation, but because they are Jews, and Jews, they have been indoctrinated to believe, are an abomination.

Anyone with eyes in his head can see this. It has been obvious for 16 years.

The smart set’s failure to note reality back in September 2000 marked the beginning of its descent into moral oblivion.

Its first step down that road was when its members coined the pernicious term, “cycle of violence.”

“Cycle of violence,” means that there is no moral distinction between a murderer and a policeman, between a society geared toward annihilating its victim and its victim’s actions to prevent that from happening.

The latest consequence of this moral depravity came on Friday with the publication of the so-called Middle East Quartet’s much awaited report that is supposed to show us the way to peace. That report – like its predecessors insisted that a Jewish “settler,” is the moral equivalence of a Palestinian murderer.

The day before the report was released, we saw – yet again – the evil empowering nature of that claim.

Thursday morning, a hate-drenched, demonic Palestinian murderer took a knife and stole into Kiryat Arba – a “settlement.”

He broke into the Ariel family’s home. He walked into their children’s bedroom. He found 13 year old Hallel Yaffa asleep in her bed.

He stabbed her, repeatedly. When there was no place left to stab her in her face and chest, he turned her over and continued stabbing her in the back.

The murderer set off the sensors in Kiryat Arba’s security fence when he traversed it. It took but three of minutes for the community’s security team to get to the house. They shot and killed the Palestinian assailant and so prevented him from moving to the adjacent high school and transforming his slaughter into a massacre.

But Hallel was already gone.

The next day, the Mark family was driving along Highway 60. A Palestinian car carrying murderers drove up beside them and opened fire on Michael Mark, his wife Chavi and their children. Mark was murdered, his wife and daughter seriously hurt and his son was wounded as the car flipped over and over, after Mark lost control of the wheel.

On cue, the Palestinians began celebrating the murders and the murderers. The PLO governor of Hebron paid a condolence call at the home of Hallel’s killer. The Palestinian media celebrated their crimes. And a new high quality animated film was released on Facebook directing viewers to murder MK Yehuda Glick. The film included driving directions to Otniel, and images of terrorists burrowing under the security fence to enter the community and avoid detection.

Amidst all of this, the Quartet released its report. And although the report struck the tone of neutrality – both sides need to do this and both sides need to do that, the fact is that after 16 years of Palestinian atrocities against Israelis, the Quartet’s determination that they are the same is a moral atrocity.

The Quartet recommends that both sides “de-escalate tensions.” But of course, only the Palestinians are escalating tensions.

Both sides, the wise men tell us, “should take all necessary steps to prevent violence and protect the lives and property of all civilians.”

But only one side is fomenting violence and deliberately targeting civilians.

Both sides, the Quartet says, should “exercise[e] restraint and refrain from provocative actions and rhetoric.”

But only one side is engaging in provocative actions and rhetoric, unless the Quartet says that Israel responding angrily to the slaughter of its children and families is acting provocatively – which of course is what they are implying here.

And it gets worse. The report includes an empty call for the Palestinians “to act decisively and take all steps within its capacity to cease incitement to violence and strengthen ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including by clearly condemning all acts of terrorism.”

The Palestinians of course, will do no such thing. Abbas is the engine of the incitement and the violence. He always has been. And the fact that he’s been able to get away with this since taking over from Arafat 12 years ago shows that the moral miasma of the West has become a danger to world peace.

After pretending that the people who transformed Palestinian society into the hate-filled, murder applauding mob it has become are interested in doing the opposite, the Quartet turned its guns on Israel.

Israel needs to deny Jewish property rights. Israel needs to expand the powers of the Palestinian death cult into Area C – where all the Israeli communities are located and but two percent of the Palestinians live.

Israel needs to expand its security cooperation with Abbas’s US-trained militias that have been marinated in the same Jew hatred as the rest of the Palestinians, and have often propagated.

Sunday afternoon, hundreds of people stood silently outside the Ariel home in Kiryat Arba, waiting to enter the modest home to console the family. The landscape outside is pastoral.

The Ariels live off of their vineyard and the wine they produce.

Surrounded by the vines, and the hills, the Ariel’s homestead looks like the sort of place where nothing bad can happen. A quiet family of profound faith, the Ariels were just going about their quiet lives, raising their daughters, tending to their vines when the evil beyond their gate entered their home and struck.

That is the difference between the two sides. One wishes to tend his vineyard. The other wishes to destroy it.

It is black and white. It is a clear distinction.

The international community’s pernicious refusal to recognize this basic fact, after so many years, is a major reason that there is no peace, and there is so much bloodshed. (For more from the author of “The Atrocity Known as Moral Equivalence” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

GOP Adopts Reaganesque Stance on Religious Liberty

Rights of conscience are under assault not only in the United States, but all over the globe. The draft of the 2016 Republican platform, as adopted Tuesday evening, doesn’t mince words about what party’s position on the issue.

The platform language also takes a strong stance on global human rights, especially the right of conscience (religion, speech, association, etc), which are under ever-increasing assault worldwide. 2015 Pew polling found that 77 percent of the world’s population lives in a country with either “high” or “very high overall level restrictions on religion.”

At one point, an amendment was proposed striking language condemning the Castro regime and Obama administration’s policy of opening the door to Havana, arguing that the best way to improve the regime is through trade and open dialogue. This was promptly shut down by others on the committee, who remember the failure of improving the Chinese regime through trade.

In particular, the original language states that “China’s behavior has negated the optimistic language” of the 2012 platform.

“The liberalizing policies of recent decades have been reversed” under Xi Jinping it reads, with “dissent brutally crushed, religious persecution heightened and the cult of Mao revived.”

The committee added additional language on “International Religious Freedom” in the draft, which condemns both religious oppression in the sorts of regimes mentioned above and the Obama administration’s neglect of the role of the United States Committee on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan watchdog group championed by GOP congressmen in the late 1990s. Additionally, the GOP platform promises to restore religious freedom advocacy to a prominent place in diplomatic negotiations.

USCIRF “has been neglected by the current Administration at a time when its voice more than ever needs to be heard,” according to the original draft of the language obtained by CR. “A Republican Administration will return the advocacy of religious liberty to a central place in its diplomacy.”

Finally, the document directly addresses the plight of Christians, Yazidis and other religious minorities in the Middle East, who have suffered genocide at the hands of ISIS since the Jihadist insurgency’s rise to power in the summer of 2014. The adopted language formally acknowledges ISIS’ actions as genocide and even supports the creation of a safe haven for religious minorities in Northern Iraq.

This language comes at a time when the rights of conscience are under assault not only in America, but around the world. Prisoners of conscience still languish in prisons and face arbitrary arrests in communist regimes like China, Cuba, and Vietnam, Russia is cracking down on religious expression, and ISIS has been committing genocide against religious minorities in Iraq and Syria for two years now.

Furthermore, these trends have shown no reversal whatsoever under President Obama, whose administration has cut deals with totalitarian regimes, effectively shrugged at China’s human rights record, brazenly opened the door to Cuba, and whose Middle East policies have given rise to an international Jihadist insurgency under ISIS.

In an age of global persecution, Americans need a policy on global human rights reminiscent of the kind Reagan enacted on behalf of dissidents in the Soviet Union and elsewhere. These sections of the Republican platform offer an example of what that might look like in the 21st century. (For more from the author of “GOP Adopts Reaganesque Stance on Religious Liberty” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Venezuela Putting Its Food Supply Under Military Control Is So Chilling

In the state of nature, force triumphs over all else. If societal progress is measured by movement towards voluntary individualism and away from coercion at the hands of strongmen, then by all accounts Venezuela is regressing into this decivilized state.

That is the takeaway given the news breaking this week that Venezuelan potentate President Nicolás Maduro is putting the country’s military in charge of its food supply.

As the Wall Street Journal details, “Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino…will be in charge of transporting and distributing basic products, controlling prices and stimulating production, according to a decree published Tuesday in the official gazette.”

If you think that Solyndra was an epic government-backed failure, it will look like child’s play compared to the scale of the catastrophe sure to take place now that Venezuela’s government is putting the very sustenance of the nation under the central planning of a military leader.

The symbolic value of such an act cannot be overstated. When the literal lifeblood of a nation is put in the hands of a police force, you know that said nation is on the brink of total collapse, leading to more crippling state control as disorder devolves into all-out chaos. Not even the most doe-eyed Bernie Sanders supporter could think it a wise or comforting decision to put the supply over a nation’s food in the hands of a defense minister. It is as irrational a decision as it is a chilling one.

It can only be called rational from Maduro’s perspective insofar as control over the food supply is a proxy for total control over the people in a struggle to retain power.

Naturally, it represents the exact opposite of what a nation that wishes to avoid starvation, let alone prosper, ought to be doing. It is the Venezuelan government’s widespread economic intervention, its abrogation of contractual and property rights and its debauching of its currency that has ruined any semblance of a functioning marketplace. Putting the food supply under military control is dumping kerosene on the fire.

The surest path out of the socialist death spiral must involve re-empowering the citizens by creating the conditions necessary for buyers and sellers to communicate through a healthy and functioning price mechanism. Citizens must determine the quantity, quality and price at which goods and services are to be produced, consumed and traded. Government does not have the ability nor the moral right to do so.

However jarring the denationalization of Venezuelan industry might be, such pains will pale in comparison to the starvation and bloodshed that the Chavez-Maduro regime’s tyrannical central planning will result in.

Meanwhile, man’s former last best hope on Earth is apparently MIA. As Senator Ted Cruz’s, R-Texas (A, 97%) national security advisor Dr. Victoria Coates noted just yesterday at Conservative Review:

The State Department issued a statement last week that acknowledged Venezuela’s “extremely difficult” past year, but urged “leaders of all branches of the government to engage in the national dialogue required to effectively address your country’s problems.”

In other words, rather than issuing a call for solidarity with the people of Venezuela as they try to regain their dignity, liberty and rights, our Department of State is proposing throwing a life line to a dying socialist regime that is the avowed enemy of the United States.

Unfortunately this statement is not a one-off; it is part of a deliberate policy initiated more than a year ago that is pursuing rapprochement with the Maduro regime rather than developing a plan to support his opposition.

And while we throw the Venezuelan people to the wolves by showing cowardice and complicity in not strongly opposing the Maduro regime, America maddeningly continues to follow in its footsteps. In spite of the self-evident disaster of Venezuelan state economic intervention, and the violent controls that its central planners are putting into place as their plans go haywire, the Democratic Party is now advocating again for the so-called “public option” on healthcare – that is, socialized medicine.

Writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, in an article dated July 11, President Obama urges Congress to revisit a public plan option “to compete alongside private insurers in areas of the country where competition is limited.” Who knew that government-created competition was the answer to what ails us?

Examples abound around the world of the great man-caused disaster that is socialism. That we continue to attempt such collectivist experiments in spite of the abundant horrifying evidence defines insanity. When will we learn the lesson that freedom works? (For more from the author of “Why Venezuela Putting Its Food Supply Under Military Control Is So Chilling” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama’s Legacy Is Likely to Be Nuclear-Armed Iran

One year after the negotiation of the nuclear agreement, Iran continues to pursue the hostile policies that make it dangerous to the United States and its allies.

Iran persists in its attempts to: cheat on its nuclear nonproliferation obligations, export terrorism, threaten U.S. allies, provoke confrontations with U.S. naval vessels in the Persian Gulf, flout United Nations Security Council resolutions by staging provocative missile tests, and trumpet its contemptuous hostility to the United States.

Yet, President Barack Obama’s administration, hoping to lock in a nuclear deal that it sees as a positive legacy, is bending over backward to accommodate Tehran’s demands for greater economic rewards through sanctions relief over and above that required by the nuclear agreement.

Iran’s long record of nuclear cheating, current hostile behavior, and continued truculence make it increasingly clear that this administration’s legacy is likely to be a nuclear-armed Iran.

Last week, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency revealed that Iran has continued its clandestine efforts to procure illicit nuclear and ballistic missile technology and equipment from German companies “at what is, even by international standards, a quantitatively high level.”

To make matters worse, another German intelligence report indicated that the Iranians not only were continuing their efforts to acquire nuclear technology after the agreement was signed, but they also sought items that could be used to make illegal chemical and biological weapons.

The intelligence report from the state of Rhineland-Palatinate’s intelligence agency, the equivalent of an FBI field office, stated that Iran aggressively targeted German companies whose equipment could be used “for atomic, biological, and chemical weapons in a war.”

Two German intelligence officials subsequently confirmed to The Wall Street Journal that the Iranian procurement efforts continued this year and involved front companies operating from the United Arab Emirates, Turkey, and China, and to a lesser extent from Turkmenistan and Iraq.

The independent Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security reported last week that many Iranian entities previously sanctioned for acquiring illicit nuclear technologies are now actively obtaining goods in China:

This uptick in activity in China corresponds to a reduced emphasis on enforcement in the United States over alleged illegal Iranian procurement activities. During the last two years, the Obama administration has inhibited federal investigations and prosecutions of alleged Iranian illegal procurement efforts. The stated reason has been concern over the impact on the Iran nuclear deal.

In other words, the administration has prioritized preserving the nuclear deal over enforcing it. Iran, therefore, sees little risk in continued nuclear smuggling efforts and may be emboldened in other areas as well.

David Albright and Andrea Stricker of the Institute for Science and International Security also reported on July 7 that Iran tried to buy tons of carbon fiber, which is a controlled material needed for building advanced centrifuges for uranium enrichment, from an undisclosed country. They warned that this attempt, which came after the implementation of the nuclear agreement in January, raises concerns over whether Iran intends to abide by its nuclear commitments.

This disturbing news comes after the revelation that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors found man-made uranium particles at the Parchin military complex, where Iran is suspected to have conducted nuclear weapons-related tests.

Meanwhile, Iran’s theocratic dictatorship has made it clear that the nuclear agreement will not alter its hostility to the United States or ease its malign policies toward its neighbors.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which controls Tehran’s nuclear program and ballistic missile force, has repeatedly challenged U.S. naval forces in the Persian Gulf since the nuclear agreement was reached last year.

IRGC vessels launched rockets within 1,500 yards of the carrier Harry S. Truman near the Strait of Hormuz in late December, flew drones over U.S. warships, and detained and humiliated 10 American sailors in January.

On Monday, IRGC gunboats swarmed dangerously close to a U.S. Navy ship in the Strait of Hormuz that was carrying Gen. Joseph Votel, the commander of the U.S. Central Command. The Wall Street Journal reported that there were about 300 such naval incidents orchestrated by Iran against U.S. ships in 2015.

The IRGC launched a series of ballistic missiles in March, including two that were inscribed with the message “Israel must be wiped out” in Hebrew.

On July 1, the IRGC’s deputy commander stated that more than 100,000 missiles were ready to be launched at Israel from Lebanon and that Israel’s annihilation was imminent.

Tehran continues to issue threats against other U.S. allies, including Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. The regime continues to orchestrate chants of “Death to America!”

But these threats are continuously ignored by the Obama administration, which prefers to focus on promises of Iranian compliance with its nuclear commitments, which Tehran repeatedly has broken in the past.

Proof that Iran’s regime has not changed is the fact that it is still in the hostage-taking business. When the nuclear agreement came into effect on “implementation day,” Jan. 16, Iran recovered seven Iranians charged with sanctions violations in return for four innocent American captives held as bargaining chips. A fifth American, a student jailed for unknown reasons, also was released.

The hostage deal, which the administration maintains was negotiated separately from the nuclear deal, involved the release of Iranians justifiably imprisoned or charged with sanctions violations. This swap of prisoners for hostages rewarded Iran’s dictatorship for hostage-taking and is sure to encourage it to seize more captives.

In addition to furnishing leverage over the U.S. and other countries, the Tehran regime has arrested Iranians with dual citizenship and held them hostage on flimsy charges in order to intimidate political opponents and stifle reform efforts. Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has constantly warned against the threat of political and cultural “infiltration” by the U.S. and its allies after the nuclear deal, spurring a wave of arrests and persecution of dual nationals.

A Great Deal for Iran

The administration’s diplomatic engagement without preconditions has enabled Iran’s dictatorship to have its cake and eat it too. Iran remains the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism, but has been rewarded on the nuclear front for what could be temporary and easily reversible concessions.

In addition to allowing Tehran to recover roughly $100 billion in sanctions relief, the Obama White House has encouraged European allies to increase trade and investment in Iran, cleared the path for the sale of Boeing aircraft to Iran—which could be used for military purposes—and has pressed the Financial Action Task Force, an international body that enforces money laundering standards, to ease restrictions on Iran.

The administration has gone so far as to buy 32 tons of heavy water from Iran for $8.6 million, thereby subsidizing Iran’s nuclear program. The material was meant to be used in the Arak heavy water reactor for the production of plutonium, but that reactor is being redesigned.

Under the terms of the nuclear agreement, Iran is required to reduce its supply of heavy water, but Washington is not required to purchase it. By buying the heavy water, the United States risks legitimizing Iran as a nuclear supplier and rewarding it for past violations of its nuclear obligations. Iran instead could blend the heavy water down to regular water.

But the administration, now held hostage by its desperate need to salvage a “legacy,” has downplayed the risks involved in its heavy water subsidy, just as it has downplayed all the risks inherent in the nuclear deal from the very beginning.

The White House has succumbed to a form of diplomatic “Stockholm syndrome” in which the preservation of the nuclear deal with Iran is its top priority.

Even worse, U.S. officials have said that the administration is seeking to encourage Western trade with Iran to make it more difficult for future presidents to walk away from the agreement.

U.S. allies are increasingly skeptical of Washington’s ability and willingness to strictly enforce the agreement. As a British diplomat reportedly complained, “The United States is no longer feared by its enemies or respected by its friends.”

Hope for Change: An Unrealistic Strategy for Iran

The Iran nuclear agreement, which frontloads sanctions relief for Iran and removes key restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program after 10 to 15 years, makes no sense unless the Obama administration believes that Iran’s tyrannical regime will be transformed in the immediate future.

Unfortunately, Obama sees himself as a transformative figure and presumes that his engagement with Iran and the nuclear agreement are transformative, rather than purely transactional, operations.

The administration has argued that the agreement will help Iranian “moderates” in a supposed power struggle with hard-liners. But the power struggle in Iran today pits hardliners against ultra hard-liners.

The genuine moderates that the administration should have engaged were purged by the regime in 2009 after massive public protests against Iran’s fraudulent elections. The Obama administration watched from the sidelines during that crisis, intent on unconditionally engaging the hard-liners who brutally suppressed the opposition green movement. As a result, there is a lot less hope for change in Iran today.

The nuclear deal that the administration negotiated with these hardliners is unlikely to last any longer than the nuclear agreement that the Clinton administration negotiated with North Korea in 1994.

It will be up to the next administration to clean up the disastrous Iranian nuclear legacy that it inherits from this one. (For more from the author of “Obama’s Legacy Is Likely to Be Nuclear-Armed Iran” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Refuses Request to Honor Dallas’ Fallen Heroes

Policemag.com reports that following the Dallas shooting Thursday night that left five police officers dead, a request was made to illuminate the White House in blue to honor those officers killed in the attack.

Jon Adler, president of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, said in a statement that the group appreciated the president’s order that flags to be flown at half-staff; however, he asked President Obama to show his full respect for those who made the ultimate sacrifice by displaying law enforcement’s “Thin Blue Line” at the White House. Adler said this act would go further to show Obama’s commitment to law enforcement than his “scripted words.”

Although the White House has been illuminated for occasions such as Breast Cancer Awareness (pink) and the Supreme Court’s legalization of same-sex marriages (rainbow), Obama refused Adler’s request.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott ordered the Governor’s Mansion in Austin to be illuminated in honor of the slain officers.

Adler said that the law enforcement community was unable to receive comfort from the scripted comments from people such as House Speaker Paul Ryan and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Referring to Ryan’s remark that this is “a time for healing,” Adler pointed out that another officer had been shot in Missouri. “We can’t heal while law enforcement officers continue to bleed,” he said.

As for Pelosi, who quoted the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., Adler stated that she needed to exhibit Dr. King’s leadership ability rather than quoting his statements.

Adler’s statement also urged officials to eliminate their scripted speeches and feel the pain that people across the country are feeling from this attack. He suggested they light a blue candle and say a prayer in lieu of insulting members of law enforcement with “perishable scripted gibberish.”

Adler said the illumination of the White House would be a tribute to the service of five fallen heroes, ending the statement by saying, “May all our fallen heroes rest in honor, and blessed eternal peace.” (For more the author of “Obama Refuses Request to Honor Dallas’ Fallen Heroes” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Dallas Police Chief Reveals Something Terrible Happened Right After Shootings

Dallas Police Chief David Brown, who on Sunday noted the willingness of his officers to show “no greater love” than laying down their lives for the rights of others, revealed Monday that he has been targeted with death threats.

“We’re taking them all as credible, whether they can be confirmed or not,” Brown said at a Monday press conference. Brown said threats against him began “almost immediately after” Thursday night’s deadly ambush.

Brown said the threats are being taken “very seriously … for the sake of our families.”

The police chief said he was “running on fumes.” “I hope you understand my brain is fried. … I’m a person of faith. I believe that I’m able to stand here and discuss this with you is a testament to God’s grace and His sweet tender mercies,” Brown said.

He then spoke about the burdens dumped upon police departments.

“We’re asking cops to do too much in this country. We are. We’re just asking us to do too much,” he said. “Every societal failure, we put it off on the cops to solve. Not enough mental health funding. Let the cop handle it. Not enough drug addiction funding. Let’s give it to the cops.”

“Here in Dallas, we’ve got a loose dog problem,” Brown added. “Let’s have the cops chase loose dogs. You know, schools fail. Give it to the cops. Seventy percent of the African-American community is being raised by single women. Let’s give it to the cops to solve that, as well. That’s too much to ask. Policing was never meant to solve all of those problems.”

On Sunday, Brown sought to speak directly to protesters during in a CNN interview with Jake Tapper.

“We’re sworn to protect you and your right to protest, and we’ll give our lives for it,” Brown said.

“And it’s sort of like being in a relationship where you love that person, but that person can’t express or show you love back,” he said.

He then explained his philosophy to Tapper.

“I don’t know if you’ve been in a relationship like that before, Jake, but that’s a tough relationship to be in, where we show our love — because there’s no greater love than to give your life for someone, and that’s what we’re continuing to be willing to do.”

Brown said the fact that the police allow protesters to exercise their First Amendment rights is too rarely noticed.

“And we just need to hear from the protesters back to us, ‘We appreciate the work you do for us in our right to protest,’” Brown said. “That should be fairly easy.” (For more from the author of “Dallas Police Chief Reveals Something Terrible Happened Right After Shootings” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pence, Gingrich Make the Final Cut in Trump’s VP Search, sources Say

As anticipation builds for Donald Trump to name his vice presidential pick, two hopefuls — Indiana Gov. Mike Pence and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — appear to be the front-runners, according to a person familiar with the deliberations.

Also still in the mix: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Trump will likely make the announcement on Friday, the source said.

Pence introduced Trump at a rally Tuesday in Indiana that served as an audition of sorts as the presumptive Republican nominee closes in on a decision. The Indiana governor happily played the role of attack dog by slamming Hillary Clinton and saying she “must never become president of the United States.” (Read more from “Pence, Gingrich Make the Final Cut in Trump’s VP Search, sources Say” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Report: US Tax Dollars Paid for Anti-Netanyahu Effort in Israel

Obama administration officials “took no action” to stop the Department of State-financed group called OneVoice International when it launched a campaign to topple Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, according to a bipartisan Senate staff report issued Tuesday.

The report is the first official confirmation of Obama administration political meddling in the 2015 Israeli national elections. Republican and Democratic members of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations endorsed the report.

It’s likely to rekindle anger within Israel over the anti-Netanyahu tilt expressed by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her successor, Secretary of State John Kerry.

Neither Clinton nor Kerry attempted to block the award of U.S. tax dollars to the group despite its public intervention in Israeli politics.

“OneVoice’s track record of involvement in Israeli elections did not deter the State Department from making the grants,” the report said. “The subcommittee’s investigation revealed that, during the grant period, OneVoice developed a political strategy designed to defeat the incumbent Israeli government.”

The report also said, “the State Department failed to adequately guard against the risk that resources built with government grants would be deployed for political purposes.”

The subcommittee also found “there were regular meetings between State Department officials and grantee representatives, including some 26 meetings or events recorded by the U.S. embassy that were held between various officials and OneVoice.”

Subcommittee Chairman Sen. Rob Portman of Ohio said “it is completely unacceptable that U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to build a political campaign infrastructure that was deployed against the leader of our closest ally in the Middle East. The State Department ignored warnings signs and funded a politically active group in a politically sensitive environment with inadequate safeguards.”

At one point, some State Department officials expressed discomfort about the group’s anti-Israel messaging, including promotional materials “proclaiming Jerusalem to be the holy capital of Palestine.”

Even so, OneVoice received a grant of $465,000 which included the payment of $40,000 to 270 Strategies, OneVoice’s consulting firm.

270 Strategies is an American political consulting firm founded by Jeremy Bird and Mitch Stewart, two senior campaign staff for Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign.

Former Ambassador Marc Ginsberg, who served during President Jimmy Carter’s administration and was the U.S. ambassador to Morocco under President Bill Clinton, was CEO of OneVoice at the time.

Ginsberg received $211,000 in income, according to the 2014 tax filing for the parent organization, called the Peaceworks Foundation

Jewish billionaire Daniel Lubetzky underwrites Peaceworks. The group reported in 2014 net assets of $3.8 million.

In 2016, Lubetzky donated $7,300 to the Democratic National Committee and $2,700 to presidential candidate and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2016.

In an email obtained by the subcommittee, Ginsberg “circulated a ‘roadmap strategy” and said 270 Strategies “has become an essential partner” for the group.

OneVoice “resources would be deployed to disrupt the Netanyahu-led coalition by pushing for the ‘defection’ of ‘center/center-left political parties,’” the report said.

The staff stated the “Definition of Success” would be “forcing the [Netanyahu- led] coalition to collapse,” according to a OneVoice memo.

“As described by its CEO, OneVoice’s objective was to use its grassroots- organizing resources to become a decisive influence in the next election,” according to the report.

OneVoice was not coy about its political ambitions in its discussions with federal officials.

“OneVoice was candid with the State Department regarding its past political involvement. … Less than six months before seeking State Department funds, [OneVoice] had operated a grassroots campaign in the 2013 Israeli parliamentary elections to help ‘increase[e] the number of center-left seats in the [Israeli] Knesset’—which it described as one of its ‘Strategic Milestones,’” according to the report.

When the Netanyahu coalition government collapsed, “OneVoice shifted its focus to influencing the electoral outcome by working to defeat incumbent Prime Minister Netanyahu. Planning for this effort began during the period when OneVoice was still a State Department grantee.”

OneVoice did not directly use State Department funds for political activities, “but it did use the campaign infrastructure and resources that it had built, in part, with State Department funds to support a campaign to defeat Prime Minister Netanyahu in the 2015 elections,” the report said.

OneVoice “absorbed” the Israeli anti-Netanyahu group called “Victory 15” or V15. “V15 had no further independent organizational existence,” the report said. “There was no legal entity known as V15 in Israel or the United States. V15 had no separate bank account.” (For more from the author of “Report: US Tax Dollars Paid for Anti-Netanyahu Effort in Israel” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

U.S. Post-Recession Economic Growth at 70-Year Low

President Barack Obama has spent much of 2016 making sure his legacy on immigration, health care, LGBT priorities and the economy will be remembered. The first three history will remember, though possibly not for the reasons he hopes. But his legacy on the economy may not be quite what he was hoping it would be.

According to an analysis from the Congressional Research Service (CRS), America’s economy is growing at the slowest post-recession rate since just after World War II. Congress’ research arm noted that “Although this expansion is already the fourth longest since the 1850s (34 quarters to date), the slow pace of economic growth means the overall gains have been relatively small. … Real GDP has grown at an average pace of 2.0% per year during the current recovery, compared with an average rate of 4.3% during the previous 10 expansions.”

The Slow-Growing Economy

CRS compared economic growth under Obama to that which happened under President Ronald Reagan, both who came into office under tough economic conditions. “[T]he recession beginning in 1980 was also particularly long and severe and the economy grew very quickly after entering its recovery.” After the same amount of time, real GDP has grown by only 10%, while it grew over 30% under Reagan.

Where blame lies for the slow-growing economy is less clear, according to CRS. The non-partisan research arm of Congress pointed to several popular theories. Among them:

Financial-caused recessions may lead to slower recoveries than other recessions

The Great Recession’s high unemployment and high rates of long periods of unemployment may have atrophied the skills of workers

The Federal Reserve’s extremely low interest rates have discouraged investment

America’s recoveries may be slowing, overall — each of the last four economic growth periods has been smaller than the one before it. Blame under this theory has been laid at the feet of “an aging population, a slowdown in educational attainment, increased inequality, and a high debt to GDP ratio,” says CRS

Hedge fund manager and Euro Pacific Capital CEO Peter Schiff believes Federal Reserve policy bears responsibility for the slow growth, reports The Washington Free Beacon. “This ‘recovery,’ if you want to call it that, is far weaker than prior recoveries because it is wholly artificial,” Schiff said. “It has been manufactured by Federal Reserve stimulus in the form of quantitative easing and zero percent interest rates.”

“I expect that we will have very low growth, or even negative growth as long as the Fed continues to ‘stimulate’ the economy,” he continued. “Frankly, I do not believe we have achieved even 2 percent growth over the last five or six years. The only reason we can even get GDP at that level is because the Fed has used extremely low inflation estimates, far below 1 percent. If they admitted inflation was higher, growth would have been reported even lower.”

Obama’s Victory Lap, And Bad News

For his part, Obama took a victory lap in Elkhart, Indiana, in late spring, praising the policies of his administration for economic improvements since 2009 in the local and national economies. However, economist Veronique de Rugy says blame for slow growth falls on some of those same policies.

“[T]he last eight years have been really awful for the labor market, whether it’s through Obamacare, the increase in the minimum wage, uncertainty in the market,” said de Rugy. “Uncertainty means paralysis. Making the cost of low-income labor more expensive isn’t helping.”

The CRS report is just the latest bad economic news in recent months. In June, Federal Reserve Chairperson Janet Yellen told Congress that the unemployment is artificially low because people are not looking for work.

“The unemployment rate fell to 4.7 percent in May, but that decline mainly occurred because fewer people reported that they were actively seeking work,” Yellen told Senators on the Banking, House, and Urban Affairs Committee. “A broader measure of labor market slack that includes workers marginally attached to the workforce and those working part-time who would prefer full-time work was unchanged in May and remains above its level prior to the recession.”

Additionally, an analysis of economic data from the federal Bureau of Labor & Statistics (BLS) found that U.S. productivity growth is at its lowest five-year rate since 1947. (For more from the author of “U.S. Post-Recession Economic Growth at 70-Year Low” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.