BloggeRhythms

Fortunately for the nation, there’s still time left for information gathering regarding the senseless nuclear deal with Iran. The time’s obviously needed, because evidence continues to mount proving that Iran has never intended to maintain its side of the bargain.

 

Adam Kredo writes today @Washington Free Beacon that, “Iranian leaders prevented a top International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) official from disclosing to U.S. officials the nature of secret side deals with the Islamic Republic by threatening harm to him, according to regional reports.

 

“Yukiya Amano, IAEA director general, purportedly remained silent about the nature of certain side deals during briefings with top U.S. officials because he feared such disclosures would lead to retaliation by Iran, according to the spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization (AEOI).

 

”Amano was in Washington recently to brief members of Congress and others about the recently inked nuclear accord. However, he did not discuss the nature of side deals with Iran that the United States is not permitted to know about.”

 

Thus, what’s going to be most interesting to watch is what the sheep-like congressional Democrats do as the worthlessness of the deal continues to surface. Including how the Iranians played a POTUS who they realized was more interested in achieving personal goals than those of his nation. It also looks like Republicans were not only correct from the beginning, but will gain significantly at the polls next November.    

 

On another matter, it was questioned here a couple of months ago regarding a sparsely covered story, that the administration was prepared to cede control of the Internet to an international body managed by the U.N. At the time, this writer couldn't see how, or why, a decision like that could be made by American representatives at any level, much less those at the top of the government.   

 

And then, today in an article @yahoo.com it’s reported that, “The US is extending its oversight of a body that controls part of the Internet's structure, the Department of Commerce said, postponing a possible handover of responsibilities to a private entity.

 

“Assistant secretary for communications Lawrence Strickling posted an update Monday on plans to hand over domain name system oversight to a private body.”

 

Strickling said, "It has become increasingly apparent over the last few months that the community needs time to complete its work, have the plan reviewed by the US Government and then implement it if it is approved." 

 

A reader, Bret, saved yours truly considerable typing by commenting that, “The Internet was invented in the USA via government and private entities working together. The Internet is now a very important part of America as well as the rest of the world. America has been very responsible in the development and control of the Internet (except for Obama's executive order to give the FCC the right to regulate the Internet and giving ICANN away). Trump will deal with Obama's executive orders. So, why, why, why would we ever want to give up any level of control of the Internet to other powers. If the wrong people get control then we may lose many of the freedoms we enjoy today. I say keep ICANN under USA control.”

 

Except for the reference to Trump, which remains to be seen, reader Bret was precisely correct. Which now makes one wonder why the administration seems to have done something right for a change, by rethinking what would be a giveaway for no rational reason.

 

Which brings us to today’s update on Bill Clinton’s wife.

 

John Sexton @breitbart.com writes that, “More than two years after the State Department claimed there were no emails responsive to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a close Hillary Clinton adviser’s contact with the media, the Department has informed a judge it has located 17,855 emails that appear to match the criteria.”

 

As the story continues to build, and evidence mounts against Bill’s wife, there now seems to be considerably more speculation that other Democrats may have a chance of gaining their party’s presidential nomination.

 

In that regard, the following excerpt from an article on realclearpolitics.com is shown because it contains a suggestion made here for over a year now.

 

Ian Schwartz writes: “Former Speaker of the House and Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich talks to FOX News' Greta van Susteren about the affect of Hillary Clinton's private server controversy on her campaign for the presidency.

 

“Gingrich predicted the former Secretary of State will not be the Democratic nominee and that Republicans "should worry" about Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders instead.”

 

Gingrich then went on to say that, “he wouldn't be surprised if Michael Bloomberg, Jerry Brown or Elizabeth Warren jump in the race if it looks like Hillary Clinton will implode.”

 

Therefore, except for the mention of Elizabeth Warren, one would have to assume that Mr. Gingrich is a reader of these daily entry’s which for quite a long time now have always ended by asking the ongoing question: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you reading this? 

 

That's it for today folks. 

 

Adios