Democrats also question Biden's Iran nuke deal

 Washington Free Beacon:

House Democrats are privately becoming increasingly skeptical of a new nuclear deal with Iran, as concerns mount over carveouts in the accord that will provide Iran with billions of dollars in cash windfalls and permit Russia to build up the country’s nuclear sites, according to Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), the lead Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC).

"We’re in the minority. But there are a lot of Democrats who don’t like this deal," McCaul told the Washington Free Beacon in an exclusive interview last week from the sidelines of the annual Republican policy retreat. HFAC members on both sides of the aisle emerged from a recent classified briefing on the deal with mounting concerns that the concessions granted under the deal outweigh the benefits of limited restrictions on Iran’s contested nuclear program.

McCaul said that during the briefing, "I was doing a whip count [and] it was not good for the [Biden] administration." Republicans would need at least eight House Democrats to break ranks and vote with them in opposition to a deal. And though the deal is likely to be announced well before the midterm elections, it is expected that if Republicans take the majority they will move to reimpose sanctions on Iran and nullify the terms of any deal Biden inks.
...

The Obama nuke deal with Iran was bad and this one is worse.  Both look crazy.  They put Iran on the glide path to unclear weapons and give the genocidal religious bigots or Iran money and infrastructure to make it easier for them to get nuclear weapons. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Washington Post: Some Democrats eye adding more justices to the Supreme Court to change its ideological bent The once-remote idea has gained the attention of liberals angered by the GOP push to remake the federal courts. Probably the easy way to defeat this court-packing scheme is for Trump to propose doing the same thing now.  It would lead to Democrat denunciations and claims that it would be wrong, thereby blowing up any attempt by them in the unfortunate event of Democrats winning a presidential election.
Read more

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Conn Carroll: A new survey of 368 midsize to large companies found that 29% of them are considering terminating their active employee health care plans when Obamacare is full implemented in 2014. Only 71% of employers surveyed said they did not expect to drop their health coverage, while 20% said they did not know and 9% said they were planning to exit. The latest survey, conducted by Towers Watson, echoes an ealier survey by McKinsey & Co. finding that 30% of private-sector employers were planning to drop their employee health insurance coverage by 2014. When the Congressional Budget Office crunched Obamacare's spending numbers, they estimated that only 7% of employees currently covered by employer-sponsored plans would lose their plans. ... This means the cost of the health care fiasco will be hundreds of billions more than estimated by the CBO and Congressional Democrat. It is also clear that Obama's pledge that you could keep your health care plan if you wanted t...
Read more

Is the F-35 obsolete?

Headline USA: Pentagon Fires Back after Musk Calls Its Most Expensive Project ‘Obsolete’ 'Yeah, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Mr. Musk is, currently, a private citizen, I'm not going to make any comments about what a private citizen may have to say about the F-35....'   ... ... Drones appear to be replacing jets for many operations.  The Russia-Ukraine war is an example of that.  Drones are often hard to detect and can be used for intelligence operations as well as for attacking enemy targets.  It would not surprise me to see drones engaging other drones in combat.  They also cost much less than manned fighters.  
Read more