BloggeRhythms

Today’s opening item, regarding missile development and build-up in Iran, has significant importance. Not only because of the subject, but also because of it’s author, Fred Fleitz. 

Mr. Fleitz is senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy, a Washington, DC national security think tank. He held U.S. government national security positions for 25 years with the CIA, DIA, and the House Intelligence Committee staff. He also served as Chief of Staff to John R. Bolton when he was Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security in the George W. Bush administration. He specializes in the Iranian nuclear program, terrorism, and intelligence issues.

Mr. Fleitz writes @FoxNews.com: “On March 30, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei rejected Western pressure for Iran to stop testing ballistic missiles and a statement by a former Iranian president favoring negotiations instead of the missile program by warning in a speech: “People say that tomorrow’s world is a world of negotiations and not a world of missiles.”  Khamenei added, “If they say this thoughtlessly, it shows that they are thoughtless. However, if this is intentional, then this is treachery.” 

“Khamenei’s defiant comments came in the midst of growing international concerns about Iran’s missile program.  Iran tested two ballistic missiles last fall and several over the last month.  Written on the sides of two missiles recently tested by Iran reportedly were the words "Israel should be wiped from the pages of history."  Iran is expected to soon launch a space-launch rocket that most experts believe will be a test to develop an ICBM capable of firing nuclear warheads against Europe and the United States. 

“Iran has the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East and is the only nation in history to develop missiles with ranges of 2,000 km or more without having a nuclear weapons capability.  Although Iran claims its missiles are not intended to carry nuclear warheads, most experts believe they are being developed as a nuclear weapons delivery system.” 

Then Mr. Fleitz gets to the heart of the significant flaws in the final nuclear agreement, writing: “This is why most observers expected a missile test moratorium to be part of the Iran nuclear deal.  At first this seemed to be the case when President Obama and Secretary of State Kerry said last July that under the deal Tehran would honor UN Security Council resolutions for eight years that bar ballistic missile tests. 

“However, it turned out this was not the case since language barring Iranian missile tests is not present in the actual text of the nuclear deal -- it is buried in a July 2015 UN Security Council resolution which endorsed the deal.  This means Iran can conduct missile tests without violating the nuclear deal and causing the sanctions it lifted. Khamenei and the Iranian leadership do not want to join the community of nations – they want Iran to become a regional hegemony that will dominate the Middle East.  

“They agreed to a nuclear agreement that they know is a fraud since it allows Iran to conduct nuclear activities while it is in effect, such as uranium enrichment and development of advanced enrichment centrifuges, that will actually shorten the timeline to an Iranian nuclear bomb.” 

According to Mr. Fleitz: “Khamenei knows he will get away with pressing forward with Iran’s missile because the Obama administration is so desperate to protect the president’s legacy nuclear agreement that it will not support any meaningful action against Iran in response to the missile tests."

All of which leads Mr. Fleitz to conclude: “It is urgent that next American president reverse this disastrous legacy by tearing up the nuclear deal with Iran on his first day in office and initiate a new strategy to halt all Iranian nuclear weapons-related activities, require Iran to fully account for its past nuclear weapons work, and stop Iran’s ballistic missile program.”

And, in that regard, Mr. Fleitz couldn’t be any more correct. 

At the same time, another wheel on the administration’s bus is getting shaky. 

Rudy Takala @washingtonexaminer.com, writes: “A lawsuit from Judicial Watch, filed Thursday against the Justice Department in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, follows a 2011 Freedom of Information Act request in which the group sought information the bureau obtained from 2008 interviews with associates of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich. Those included meetings with Obama, his former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, and senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett. 

“Blagojevich was later convicted on 17 charges of public corruption related to an attempt to profit from filling the Senate seat left vacant when Obama was elected president. He is currently scheduled for release from prison in 2024.” 

Until now, the FBI has denied Judicial Watch's request for information on multiple occasions, saying that releasing what it learned from interviewing the president and his advisers could "reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings." 

However, at present, there are no enforcement proceedings related to the case known to be pending, leading critics to charge that the agency's denial is politically motivated. 

In summation, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement: "This lawsuit highlights the personal corruption issues of Barack Obama. Barack Obama and his closest aides were interviewed by the FBI in a criminal investigation and his administration doesn't want Americans to have the details. The Chicago way shouldn't trump the American people's right to know." 

Now, obviously, no one knows what will result from these steps in the case. However, if there’s any merit at all to Tom Fitton’s suspicions regarding POTUS corruption to be coincided with the FBI’s email investigation of Bill Clinton’s wife, the last few months of the presidential race may take on a whole new measure of excitement and entertainment.  

On another subject, Victoria Stilwell @bloomberg.com led off her column today by writing: “Employment in the U.S. climbed and wages picked up in March, signs of labor-market durability in the face of lethargic global growth. 

Then, after presenting the best case possible in her opening statement, she continued: “The 215,000 gain in payrolls followed a revised 245,000 February advance, a Labor Department report showed Friday. Average hourly earnings increased 0.3 percent from a month earlier, while the jobless rate crept up to 5 percent as more people entered the labor force.” 

Thus, except for 3/10ths of a percent lift in wages, the negative 30,000 shrinkage in jobs, along with a rise in the unemployment rate are presented as if they were good developments.   

Farther on Ms Stilwell reports: “The details showed that some people entering the labor force were only able to find part-time employment. The number of Americans working part-time for economic reasons rose by 135,000 to 6.12 million, the highest since August. 

“That pushed up the broadest measure of unemployment, which also includes discouraged workers, to 9.8 percent from 9.7 percent.” 

What’s most interesting here, and something the biased press rarely, if ever,  points out is that the “broadest measure of unemployment, which also includes discouraged workers, to 9.8 percent from 9.7 percent,” is the statistic always used in the past. Until it was abandoned two years ago because the short-term rate always looks so much better. In fact, that was the much harder to achieve rate by which “W” Bush was judged. And in his case was still only half of today’s misleading numbers. 

At the same time, Caroline May @breitbart.com, reports: “The labor force participation rate over the month of March remained relatively unchanged at 63 percent (compared to 62.9 percent in February), higher than it was a year ago.” Which still is in the range of the Carter administration that oversaw the worst economy in the past 40 years, until the current one.  

And now, today’s Ronald Regan quote, last in the series sent by a friend: “'If we ever forget that we're one nation under GOD, then we will be a nation gone under.” 

Bringing us to today’s sadly amusing update on Bill Clinton’s wife. 

Chuck Ross, Reporter @dailycaller.com, writes: “California Sen. Dianne Feinstein had to turn to Google during an interview earlier this week when asked to name her former colleague Hillary Clinton’s accomplishments in the Senate. 

The Chronicle’s editorial board asked Feinstein: “As someone who worked with Hillary Clinton for nearly a decade in the Senate, what in your view was her signature accomplishment as a senator?”

Feinstein, who had planned to pitch a new water plan, replied: “Golly, I forget what bills she’s been part of or authored. I didn’t really come prepared to discuss this.” 

“I should have a list,” said Feinstein, who The Chronicle described as “famously well-prepared.” 

Feinstein then told the board that it is difficult for senators without seniority to make a name for themselves in the upper chamber, adding: “I couldn’t have done that as a freshman (senator) or even as a sophomore. Clinton was never there long enough to achieve the degree of seniority that affords her the ability to do more.” 

But as The Chronicle notes, Feinstein pushed through significant legislation early in her career. Elected in 1992, Feinstein authored the 1994 federal assault weapons ban. 

While she told an aide, “Get on Google,” it is unclear what the  search returned. 

Following author Ross’s column he was assisted by a host of readers offering volumes of Bill’s wife’s accomplishments in the comments section. 

A typical example follows. This one from John (magnum) who wrote: “Here are a few of [*******] accomplishments : Vince Foster, Ron Brown, Cattle futures deal, Rose Law Firm, Left the White House dead broke, Travelgate, White Water, Clinton Foundation, Fired for lying during Watergate.” 

Whereas there were scores more of similarly negative entry’s from numerous others, with very few in Bill’s wife’s defense, the continuing question arises once again: Joe Biden, Mayor Bloomberg, Jerry Brown, and Starbuck’s chairman and CEO, Howard Schultz, are you guys reading this?   

That’s it for today folks.     

Adios