The Sunset Daily Morning (Joe) Headlines Today (Tuesday)
on
Get link
Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
Email
Other Apps
Nicole Wallace. David Ignatius, Willie Geist, Mike Barnicle, Andrea Mitchell, Gabe Gutierrez, Mike Allen, Eugene Robinson, James Stavridis, Steve Schmidt, Jim Miklaszewski, Ann Curry, Bernie Kerik, Miles Nadal, Scott Simon. Iran, powers push for nuclear deal as clock ticks toward deadline and a WAPO poll lists that 59% of Americans support reaching a Nuclear Deal with Iran whereas 31% Oppose it. But, the same exact number of 59% of the people say that they are NOT Confident that a deal would prevent Iran from actually getting a nuclear weapon compared to 37% that are confident a deal would prevent it. A PEW Research Center Poll says that 63% of the people here in the USA believe that Iran is NOT serious about addressing Nuclear Concerns compared to 27% people do believe it. And, another PEW poll says that Congress should have the Final Authority to pass or close the Iran Nuclear Arms deal compared to 29% that say that the POTUS gets that final authority to do it. In the new game (Why am I wrong" on the show (Morning Joe), David Ignatius states that one reason is that French need to approve the deal. Then Joe 'asks why he is wrong' again for saying that he feels that the POTUS should get the SUNI's, Egypt, the Saudi's, Jordan to all sign off on this and David (Ignatius) says that Joe is NOT wrong about that one. That was the first time I ever heard that one. He calls Joe correct saying that he 'is right.' The latest reports from Andrea (Mitchell) is her saying that they will wrap this up today. The European Union High Representative Federica Mogherini (L) and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif wait for a meeting with officials from P5+1, the European Union and Iran at the Beau Rivage Palace Hotel in Lausanne March 31, 2015. Reuters reports now that with a deadline hours away, Iran and six world powers ramped up the pace on Tuesday in negotiations over a preliminary deal on Tehran's nuclear program, while officials cautioned that any agreement clinched would likely be fragile and incomplete. For nearly a week, the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China have been trying to break an impasse in the talks, which are aimed at stopping Iran from gaining the capacity to develop a nuclear bomb in exchange for easing international sanctions that are crippling its economy. But disagreements on enrichment research and the pace of lifting sanctions threatened to scupper a deal that could end a 12-year standoff between Iran and the West over Tehran's nuclear ambitions and reduce the risk of another Middle East war. Officials played down expectations for the talks in the Swiss city of Lausanne. For days they have been trying to agree on a brief document of several pages outlining key headline numbers to form the basis of a future agreement. Officials said they hoped to be able to announce something, though one Western diplomat said it would be "incomplete and kick some issues down the road". Negotiations among the parties on sticking points went into the night and continued on Tuesday. They were expected to run late and possibly into Wednesday. Officials said they were hoping to agree on some kind of declaration, while any actual preliminary understanding that is agreed might remain confidential. It was also possible they would not agree on anything. "We are preparing for both scenarios," another Western diplomat said. "There still remain some difficult issues," U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told CNN. "We are working very hard to work those through. We are working into the night." Sticking Points: French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius and his German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier canceled plans to go to Berlin for a French-German summit on Tuesday. "The negotiations are at a critical and difficult phase, making the presence of both ministers in Lausanne essential," a German government source said. The real deadline in the talks, Western and Iranian officials said, is not Tuesday but June 30. They said the main sticking points remain the removal of U.N. sanctions and Iranian demands for the right to unfettered research and development into advanced nuclear centrifuges after the first 10 years of the agreement expires. Iran said the key issue was lifting sanctions quickly. "There will be no agreement if the sanctions issue cannot be resolved," Majid Takhteravanchi, an Iranian negotiator, told Iran's Fars news agency. "This issue is very important for us." The six powers want more than a 10-year suspension of Iran's most sensitive nuclear work. Tehran, which denies it is trying to develop a nuclear weapons capability, demands a swift end to sanctions in exchange for temporary limits on its atomic activities. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who was due back in Lausanne in the afternoon, told reporters in Moscow he believed there was a good chance of success. "The chances are high. They are probably not 100 percent but you can never be 100 percent certain of anything. The odds are quite 'doable' if none of the parties raise the stakes at the last minute, he said. Both Iran and the six have floated compromise proposals, but Western officials said Tehran has recently backed away from proposals it previously indicated it could accept, such as on shipping enriched uranium stocks to Russia. Officials close to the talks said dilution of the stockpiled uranium was an option, noting that the stockpiles issue was not a deal breaker. The goal of the negotiations is to find a way to ensure that for at least the next 10 years Iran is at least one year away from being able to produce enough fissile material for an atomic weapon. In exchange for temporary limits on its most sensitive atomic activities, Tehran wants an end to sanctions. Iran and the six powers have twice extended their deadline for a long-term agreement, after reaching an interim accord in November 2013. With the U.S. Congress warning it will consider imposing new U.S. sanctions on Iran if there is no agreement this week, there is a sense of urgency in the talks. "With Congress, the Iranian hawks and a Middle East situation where nobody's exactly getting on, I'm not convinced we'll get a second chance if this fails," the Western diplomat said. U.S. President Barack Obama has threatened to veto any sanctions moves by the Republican-dominated Congress. Additional reporting by Thomas Grove in Moscow; Editing by Giles Elgood. This is not great for the POTUS and for this Admin. It seems like that when the officials say they will NOT lift all sanctions as a victory of sort. That is the other issue which is that we do NOT need this deal. Iran needs it. The World may need it too. As a self-imposed Tuesday deadline nears, the United States and five other world powers are negotiating with Iran on an agreement that limits Iran's nuclear program to peaceful purposes and ensures it does not develop nuclear weapons. Here are the major sticking points that have divided negotiators: Lifting sanctions Iran has said it wants most international financial sanctions, which have strangled its economy, lifted right away once a deal is struck, with the rest lifted within 10 years. The United States wanted sanctions lifted more gradually, over 20 years or more, to ensure Iran abides by terms of the deal. Both sides agree that lifting sanctions will be tied to Iran's implementation of various requirements in the agreement. Negotiators appear to be settling on a compromise 15-year time frame, with some sanctions lifted earlier, according to media reports. Nuclear fuel stockpiles Iran has large stockpiles of low-grade uranium fuel that could be processed further for use in a bomb. World powers have sought to have that fuel shipped to Russia for processing, but Iran has rejected that option. One possible compromise: diluting or converting the fuel to forms that cannot be used in weapons, although that process could be reversed. Centrifuges Iran is operating roughly half of its 19,000 centrifuge machines to produce uranium fuel that can be used for peaceful reactors or for bombs. It has said it needs nearly 200,000 centrifuges to keep all of its planned reactors running. Such a large number would allow it to produce enough fuel for bombs quickly. The United States has agreed to a limit of just 6,500 operating centrifuges, according to media reports. Bunkered nuclear sites The United States has pressed for Iran to dismantle its fuel-processing research facility under a mountain at Fordow, which may be invulnerable to a military attack. Negotiators have discussed allowing Iran to continue developing advanced centrifuges there, but not to process uranium. Inspections How Iranian facilities will be monitored to make sure Iran doesn't cheat is still in question. The U.S. has said monitoring should include snap inspections of all sites, including military facilities, but Iran has refused. U.S. negotiators have said Iran will face the most stringent inspections ever implemented. Critics, such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, say Iran has so far refused to divulge information about its past weapons work and can still hide a secret program. Next is the Indiana issue as the Washington gov, Seattle mayor ban official travel to Indiana in wake of 'religious freedom' law. The backlash to Indiana's new religious freedom law grew Monday, even as state lawmakers move to clarify the legislation, with Wash. Gov. Jay Inslee and Seattle Mayor Ed Murray banning government-funded travel to Indiana. The statements are the latest boycott threats to emerge over claims that the law has the potential to discriminate against gays and others. Murray, a Democrat who is openly gay, issued his ban via executive order over the weekend, and Inslee issued his Monday afternoon. “I find Indiana’s new law disturbing, particularly at a time when more and more states and people in America are embracing civil rights for everyone," Inslee said in a statement. "Washington will join other states and cities in opposing this law and I will impose an administration-wide ban on state-funded travel to Indiana." Murray says the law doesn't reflect Seattle residents’ values. He also has told all city departments to review their contracts to see whether Seattle is doing business with any company whose headquarters is in Indiana. “Seattleites know that discrimination has no place in our city,” he said in a statement. “That’s just equality 101.” The primary concern is that the law might allow a business to discriminate against gay residents, such as a baker being allowed refuse an order from a gay couple for a wedding cake. But state lawmakers and Republican Gov. Mike Pence have been defending and trying to explain the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ever since the governor signed it into law on Thursday. They note that then-President Bill Clinton in 1993 signed similar federal legislation into law, and 19 other states also have similar policies. However, the Indiana law differs in several ways, primarily in that it allows a business to assert a right to "the free exercise of religion." On Monday, state Senate President Pro Tem David Long and House Speaker Brian Bosma, both Republicans, held a press conference to further explain the law. They said they will swiftly try to "clarify" its language. “The new law does not discriminate,” Long said. “And it will not be allowed. To the extent that we need to clarify through legislative action, we plan to do just that.” Aside from Indiana, 15 other states have introduced legislation in 2015 to craft or alter their religious freedom laws. Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas have introduced legislation to amend their laws. Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming are looking to put a similar law on their books. Bosma acknowledged a major concern is whether businesses will now be legally permitted to deny services to some people, as a result of the law, and that even he is unclear. “We don’t believe that will be the effect,” he said. “We are looking at options to clarify that that's the case.” Long and Bosma also conceded they called the press conference because Pence failed to clearly explain the law during an appearance Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” Pence said the legislation prohibits Indiana laws that "substantially burden" a person's ability to follow his or her religious beliefs, with the definition of "person" including religious institutions, businesses and associations. However, he did not answer directly when asked six times whether, under the law, it would be legal for a merchant to refuse to serve gay customers. Long on Monday also denied that a clarification of the law would be needed before this weekend’s men’s NCAA Final Four basketball championships, in Indianapolis. A record-breaking 158,682 people attended the games last year in Texas. And any boycott would have the potential to cut much anticipated revenue for Indianapolis-area hotels, restaurants and other businesses. The NCAA, whose headquarters is in Indianapolis, also has expressed concern about the law, as figures in corporate America and Hollywood voice their opposition. “We are especially concerned about how this legislation could affect our student-athletes and employees,” said NCAA President Mark Emmert. “We intend to closely examine the implications of this bill and how it might affect future events as well as our workforce." Angie’s List, the business-rating website, this weekend put on hold plans to expand its Indianapolis headquarters. Actor George Takei is calling for a boycott. And actor Ashton Kutcher recently tweeted: “Indiana are you also going to allow Christian establishments to ban Jews from coming in? Or Vice Versa? Religious freedom??? #OUTRAGE.” I just feel that we should be looking at what Bill Clinton said back in 1992. The times have changed for the gay community. The times have changed in the last 10 years for the gay community. I also agree that if the Wilco's of the world and if the Dan Malloys of the world want to boycott playing live shows and servicing your staffers to that state, that they need to deal that way for all 15 or so states with that law enacted in place. Also, it's happening again in Arkansas. That law we speak of that has put Indiana on the hot seat is about to become a law in my home state of Arkansas. If signed into law, individuals will have an avenue to use religion as an excuse to discriminate against LGBT people and other minorities. The measure has already passed the state Senate and House, and is very likely on its way to the Governor's desk as you read this. There is a team on the ground in Arkansas that has been working hard to fight this dangerous legislation from the very beginning mobilizing local support, educating the public and engaging with decision-makers. Plus, we've amplified the strong messages sent from corporate America – like Apple CEO Tim Cook as well as the CEO's of Walmart, Salesforce and PayPal – that this is bad business. Sadly, this will not be the last time I ask for your help to fight outrageous laws like this. They are fighting 100 anti-LGBT bills or constitutional amendments in more than 28 states across the country right now and your support is helping. Just when we thought our fight for equality had reached the tipping point – we are facing an unprecedented backlash. But for now, the most immediate threat – and the biggest opportunity – is in Arkansas. Time is of the essence! Tell Arkansas' Governor to VETO Discriminatory H.B.1228. POLITICO and the panel are going over the 'who would we want to have a beer with in the GOP' and with who will be in that primary. Texas Senator Ted Cruz has become the first Republican to eschew the phony “exploratory” phase and announce an actual presidential campaign. Rand Paul is apparently next. But as every political pooh-bah knows, the 2016 presidential contest has been underway for months, maybe even years. As this is written, in fact, several hotly contested GOP primaries already have commenced—primaries that will go a long way toward determining the Republican nominee, despite the painfully quaint notion that the voters of Iowa and New Hampshire will get the “first” say. Here, then, in no particular order, is a voter’s guide to some of the real 2016 contests—and who is currently leading them. The Laura Ingraham Primary There are other top radio talkers, but few are more effective in their crusades than Laura Ingraham, the lawyer and best-selling author. She’s both unrelenting and effective, and she has proven unusually influential with a fervent fan base numbering in the millions. Among her previous victims: Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, immigration reform proposals and their supporters, and a growing list of establishment politicians in the GOP. It’s thanks to Ingraham that people have a hard time remembering who Eric Cantor was. Her newest nemesis is Jeb Bush, or, as she calls him in her typical low-key style, that “crony capitalist disaster.” Already she’s suggested he serve as Hillary Clinton’s running mate because their views are so similar. She’s mocked both his wealth and his wife’s extravagant tastes by asking an audience, “What woman doesn’t like a man who gives her a blank check at Tiffany’s?” and then suggesting that the Bush campaign theme song should be “Diamonds are a Girl’s Best Friend.” Her website features the “Jebbernaut,” a regular tracking of his moves and utterances, and Bush’s latest outrages are a recurring feature on an entirely separate blog on the same page. Although there are a number of candidates she views favorably, such as Scott Walker, of late she’s been particularly helpful to Cruz, urging him to take on Bush more aggressively, praising him to her listeners when he does so and even outlining the Texan’s path to victory. The more conservative candidates can use someone like her, since their reception in other GOP-leaning outlets is not always so favorable. As for Bush, the only hope he has of cooling Ingraham’s pursuit is to get the Democrats to nominate Vladimir Putin. The Memoir Primary As a general rule, nobody reads political memoirs anymore—not even their authors. But on those few occasions when a political book is well-crafted and does sell well, it can be a telling sign of genuine grass-roots enthusiasm. Herman Cain’s 2012 book tour was so successful, for example, that many people almost thought he was serious about running for president. His book had the second best title in memoir history—This is Herman Cain!—augmented not only with an exclamation point but also a delightfully delusional subtitle, My Path to the White House. (For those wondering, the best memoir title ever was the ingenious A Book by Desi Arnaz. Who’s going to argue with that?) So far in 2016, unfortunately, the standard political memoir has proved to be just that. Walker’s effort was deemed a banal dud. Hillary Clinton’s was labeled “a bomb.” Others, like Jeb Bush’s, have also faced lackluster sales. All is not lost for the memoir, however. Mike Huckabee’s latest is doing better than most. It has maybe the third best title in history—God, Guns, Grits, Gays, and Gravy. Although now that I look at it, I think I added one too many “g” words to that title. Wonder which one doesn’t fit ... Still, the standout so far—and by far—has been Ben Carson, whose new memoir has sold a reported 350,000 copies. (The others average around 15,000-20,000.) Which means whatever he’s selling, somebody’s buying—a phenomenon more puzzling than the Big Mac fitness suit. Which brings us to ... The Ben Carson Primary Book sales aside, every Republican knows—even Ben Carson knows—that despite his remarkable performance in recent polls, the only scenario in which the accomplished neurosurgeon is the GOP nominee begins with: “All the other candidates are in a plane that disappears over the Bermuda Triangle.” This reality has nothing to do with his race or his not knowing what the Israeli Knesset is, or his stating that his favorite former Treasury secretary was “Andrea Mitchell’s husband,” who, by the way, is named Alan Greenspan and was never a Treasury secretary, or for his uncharitably calling the president of the United States a “psychopath.” Though, admittedly, none of these—shall we call them misstatements?—helped anything but his wallet. Still, the simple fact is that Carson will not be the first person since Dwight D. Eisenhower to win the White House without ever having served in any other public office. And General Eisenhower, if memory serves, happened to have had a few achievements under his belt that showed his management expertise. But because Carson has energized a not-insignificant segment of Republican voters—who apparently don’t care that he compares America to Nazi Germany—all the other GOP contenders will go to great lengths to court him, praise him and hopefully win over his supporters when he eventually drops out. This is, in its way, a compliment to the neophyte candidate. After all, no candidate is going to ever worry about courting George Pataki. The Media’s Favorite Republican Primary Note to Readers: This will be the first and last time you see anyone write the following in 2016: Lindsey Graham is winning a primary. Most media types don’t think much of Graham’s foreign policy views, but they love someone who seems to be having a good time—and at other Republicans’ expense. To date, Graham has proved to be a South Carolina Soupy Sales—charming, self-deprecating and always leaving reporters laughing. At a recent New Hampshire breakfast, for example, he poked fun at Ted Cruz’s place of birth. “Cruz couldn’t be here because he’s building a fence up on the Canadian border keeping his family out.” He then told the audience that they should be glad the well-heeled Jeb Bush wasn’t present “because it would [cost you] $10,000 a plate.” Basking in the love of the D.C. media doesn’t usually help a Republican candidate. Their favorite in 2000 was John McCain, who, of course, lost to George W. Bush. In 2012, it was Jon Huntsman, who fell behind Michele Bachmann and None of the Above. But it can help a candidate get more attention and respect than he might otherwise receive as an also-ran. And there are always those who say that, well, you never know, with his genial smile and his penchant for laughs, lightning could strike for the South Carolina senator. (It won’t.) The Dreaded Who-Would-You-Want-to-Have-a-Beer-With Primary Every four years, some bored pollster goes to regular people and asks them stupid questions that are supposed to be relevant to their choice for president. I think this whole thing started in 1996, after Bob Dole suggested that parents might not trust their kids with a scandal-plagued Bill Clinton, so why trust him with the presidency. (Valid point.) Voters then were asked if they’d rather have Bill Clinton or Bob Dole babysit their daughters—and Bill Clinton won! (Second place was probably Woody Allen.) These days, the big question is usually some variation of “Which of these candidates would you rather have a beer with?” The idea apparently being that people vote for the candidate with whom they seem personally most comfortable. Personally, I prefer my presidents the old-fashioned way: aloof, imperial and not remotely interested in “slow jamming the news” with Jimmy Fallon. As pertains to the 2016 crop, the most obvious answer is that you wouldn’t want to have a beer with any of them, unless you enjoy conversations over a cold one on amendments to appropriations bills, the yarn Chuck Grassley shared during an Agriculture hearing, or the latest hijinks on C-SPAN. I don’t know quite what it says about 2016 that, so far, the salt-of-the-earth candidate I’d be most interested in sharing a Miller Lite with is Donald Trump. Just be sure to bring a birth certificate. (Yes, he’s back on that again.) The Drudge Primary Few truly understand the inner workings of the inscrutable and influential Matt Drudge—which is just fine by him. By all accounts, Drudge does not care one whit about appeasing the chattering classes of the nation’s capital. Indeed, the more that candidates and their flacks try to ingratiate themselves with him, the less he seems to like it. In 2012, the Drudge Report was merciless on some of the GOP contenders, highlighting, for example, allegations against Newt Gingrich by an ex-wife on the eve of the South Carolina primary. So far this year, one candidate seems to be in the Internet impresario’s cross hairs—the aforementioned Mr. Bush—while another (Walker) seems to have won positive attention. But don’t count on either of those lasting for long. Or do count on it. Who knows? As of today, in the most recent Franklin Pierce poll which is a New Hampshire poll, Jeb Bush and Scott walker lead the pack at 15%. (Scott) numbers jumped up a few points in the last week and then we have rand Paul at 13%. Chris Christy is at 10% with Ted Cruz at 9% and Mike Huckabee at 7%. However, when voters were asked to pick the outcome, Jeb Bush is at a whopping 27% compared to Scott Walker whom is next at 9%. (Ted) Crus is then at 8% with Rand Paul at 7% and Chris Christie is at 5%.Also, George Bush Jr has a favoribility rating of 67% today. Jeb (Bush) has a long road ahead of him is what Steve Schmidt says and I agree with that statement and assessment. I also agree by saying that of Chris Christy has a decent debate ride, that to not count him out. Being resilient is a key to voters. None are great at foreign policy issues which David Ignatius agrees with and speaking of which and since the Admiral James Stravidas is on the show today, this begs to remind everyone not to forget about what is going on Yemen please because the Iran talks and whatnot should overshadow that mess the Saudi Arabia-led coalition launched air strikes in Yemen last Wednesday. Saudi intervention raises prospect of regional war between Iran and Arab states CNN reported overnight that the foreign intervention in Yemen's chaos has dramatically raised the stakes in the Arabian Peninsula, threatening to expand what is already a civil war into a conflict pitting Iran against Saudi Arabia and an Arab coalition. The Saudis launched Operation "Decisive Storm" last Wednesday with dozens of air strikes in an effort to blunt the advance of Houthi militia and allied army units on the port of Aden -- and to protect the last bastion of Yemen's internationally-recognized President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi. There were also strikes in and around the capital, Sanaa, which resumed early Monday. Many analysts were surprised at the speed and scale of the Saudi air campaign, which the Kingdom said would continue until the Houthis -- a Shia minority that has swept across the country in the last six months -- retreated and laid down their arms. Essentially the Saudis are trying to bomb the Houthis to the negotiating table. Who are the Houthis BTW? The Houthis have responded by threatening a campaign of suicide bomb attacks inside Saudi Arabia. Iran, which has supported the Houthis as fellow Shia, described the Saudi offensive as a "dangerous move that would kill any chance at peaceful resolution of the crisis." Yemen is becoming the latest battleground in a contest for regional superiority between Saudi Arabia and Iran that goes back to the overthrow of the Shah during Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979. It now resembles Syria, or Bosnia 20 years ago: a patchwork of shifting fiefdoms where force is the only means of influence. Is Yemen on verge of collapse? There is a real risk that Yemen will collapse as a state, with a revived independence movement in the south, the Houthis in the north, and the Sunni heartland in between. Adam Baron, a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and expert on Yemen's tortured recent history, says, "It's not difficult to divine Saudi Arabia and its coalition partners' motivations for taking this action." The Houthis were on the verge of overrunning Aden, a strategic port that overlooks straits through which 20,000 merchant ships pass every year. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, 3.8 million barrels of oil a day passed through the Bab el Mandab Straits in 2013. But Baron believes the Kingdom's "decision to launch a full-scale military action truly risks inflaming the situation further. It will be seen as an act of aggression by most Yemenis and risks taking the situation to a place that no-one will be able to control." What's at stake for the U.S. in Yemen? As in Afghanistan, factions in Yemen do not respond well to foreign intervention. In 2009 the Saudis took military action against the Houthis in support of then President Ali Abdullah Saleh, using airstrikes and special forces, but were unable to subdue them. Now the Houthis have at least some of the $500 million in military equipment provided by the U.S. to Yemen since 2010, and they have proved to be capable fighters. They staged a lightning invasion of the capital, Sanaa, last September, taking advantage of popular discontent and an unwillingness among many army units to resist them. Since then they have moved on the Red Sea port of Hodeida and surged south toward Aden. They have also grafted themselves onto parts of the army in the battle against al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) that is now raging in central and southern Yemen. Whether Saudi and Egyptian ground forces will become involved in the conflict is the big unknown. An Arab League summit in Egypt at the weekend agreed to form a joint military force, but that will take months at least to build. In the meantime, Saudi tanks and armor have been moved closer to the Yemeni border, but Saudi officials say there are no immediate plans to launch a ground offensive. Yemen has history as a graveyard of foreign forces. In the 1960s Egypt intervened in Yemen's civil war on behalf of the anti-royalists -- an operation that sapped the Egyptian army and contributed to its failure against the Israelis in the 1967 war. The extent of the Houthis' backing from Iran is hotly disputed. President Hadi said at the weekend that Iran was behind Yemen's turmoil and the Houthis were no more than its stooges. The Houthis deny receiving help from Iran, but as the conflict worsens, they may indeed turn to Tehran for the sort of military advice that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards are providing in Iraq -- and for funding and oil. Saudi and Iranian involvement in Yemen threatens to deepen sectarian distrust in a country where Sunni and Shia have historically not been enemies. This would suit both AQAP and ISIS (Islamic State in Syria and Iraq) which announced its sudden and murderous arrival in Yemen this month with massive suicide bombings at two Houthi mosques in Sanaa, killing at least 150 people.
Is there now a threat of ground incursion looms over Yemen? As the International Crisis Group puts it, a "long history of coexistence is beginning to break down" in Yemen. Baron says one critical question is whether ISIS and AQAP will now go head-to-head in trying to kill as many Houthis as possible. For the United States, which worked hard to "stand up" the Hadi government and encourage its campaign to eradicate AQAP, recent events have been a disaster. There will be less actionable intelligence against one of al Qaeda's most potent affiliates, and its Sunni allies in the Middle East (and especially the Gulf) will have even less interest than before in dialogue with Iran on issues from its nuclear program to Iraq. U.S. options have also diminished with the hurried withdrawal of some 100 military personnel from al-Anad airbase in the south of Yemen hours before it was seized by the Houthis. Drone operations from the base had at least blunted AQAP's freedom of action, even if they failed to eradicate the group. The unseen hand in Yemen's collapse is former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was badly injured in a bomb attack in 2011, and eventually (very eventually) persuaded to cede office to Hadi after 33 years in power. But he was allowed to remain in the country and has not given up his political ambitions. Last fall, he was sanctioned by both the United Nations and the U.S. for undermining efforts to forge a new political settlement in Yemen. Baron believes Saleh is biding his time -- waiting for an opportunity to inject his son, Ahmed Ali, into Yemen's complex political equation. Ahmed Ali was formerly commander of Yemen's Republican Guard, and parts of the armed forces are still regarded as loyal to the Saleh clan. For now, Saleh has a marriage of convenience with the Houthis, but few expect it to survive. When he was President, Saleh launched a series of brief wars against the Houthis between 2004 and 2010. "Neither trusts the other; their recent cooperation notwithstanding, they are competing for political dominance, especially in the northern tribal highlands and the military," says the International Crisis Group. For the people of Yemen, the brief flash of hope that came with the Arab Spring is now a distant memory. Last week, at least nine protesters were killed in the central city of Taiz and more than 100 injured by Houthi militia. Aden has been rocked by looting and score-settling among rival clans. "Human rights in Yemen are in free-fall as even peaceful protest becomes a life-threatening activity," according to Said Boumedouha of Amnesty International. For the past three years, different parties and factions have fought over the state's few assets while the standard of living of ordinary Yemenis has continued to plummet. A U.N.-led effort to agree on a new constitution has been mired in squabbling, with all parties failing to honor commitments. "Even more damaging, those with most influence -- the Saudis and Iranians in particular -- are taking steps to undercut the negotiations," says the International Crisis Group. "This combination of proxy wars, sectarian violence, state collapse and militia rule has become sadly familiar in the region. Nobody is likely to win such a fight," the ICG says. But for now, such a fight seems destined to continue. The next great ("and strange") story we touched into at the outset today is about the coke fiends that did some partying at near by hotel that then preceded the deadly and very unnecessary shooting at NSA Gate.
One man is dead and another severely injured after gunfire erupted today at one of the main gates of the National Security Agency located at Fort Meade,Maryland. The injured man was identified as Kevin Fleming, 20, of Baltimore, according to law enforcement sources. Fleming and another man were in a stolen Ford Escape SUV when they encountered NSA police at the entrance to the Ft. Meade complex, sources said. Shortly before 9 a.m. ET, a vehicle with two people inside "attempted an unauthorized entry at a National Security Agency gate," according to a statement from the NSA. "The driver failed to obey an NSA Police officer's routine instructions for safely exiting the secure campus," the statement continued. "The vehicle failed to stop and barriers were deployed." Sources say the two inside were men dressed as women. Preliminary information indicated the two men were partying at an area hotel with a third individual when they took that individuals car without permission. However, it's still unclear how or why they ended up at the NSA gate. The owner of the SUV picked up two men dressed as women in Baltimore late Sunday, sources confirmed. The three allegedly drove to a hotel in Howard County, Maryland, where they partied, sources said. Early this morning, the man woke up alone and the two men he allegedly had picked up were gone and so was his vehicle, sources said. The man reported his vehicle stolen to Howard County Police before the incident at the NSA, sources said. A law enforcement source confirmed that the car that crashed at NSA was reported stolen in Howard County, Maryland. When the vehicle "accelerated toward an NSA police car blocking the road" and "refused to stop," an NSA police officer opened fire, and one of the two men inside the "unauthorized vehicle" ended up dead, the NSA statement said. The other man in the vehicle was "severely injured” and taken to a local hospital, according to sources. An NSA Police officer injured in the incident was also taken to the hospital. “The incident has been contained and is under investigation,” Colonel Brian Foley, Fort Meade garrison commander, said in a statement. “The residents, service members and civilian employees on the installation are safe. We continue to remain vigilant at all of our access control points." The FBI said they do not believe the incident is related to terrorism. ABC News' Devin Dwyer and Jim Avila contributed to this report. Anyway, I truly hope we do not have enter any more wars and again, like I said yesterday is that I had no clue that we could go to a war based on these talks. I guess as Steve Schmidt says that it could feasibly start another arms race. We have said many times that doing a deal for the sake of a deal would be futile and counter productive. This entire deal has become so politicized which is also not great. It does sound like there is not going to be a deal and that the most we may get out of all of this is an agreement of sort. We have less than 11 or 12 hours until this self imposed deadline we gave it. But man no matter what and no matter how this ends today is the Congress is going to be nuts over any outcome, let alone one that is loose. The author of the book, From Jailer to Jailed (Bernard Kerik) is on the show now. He discusses the fact that ,any people that should not be jail, are in jails today. Joe says this guys jailing was all politically motivated. I really do not know his story. He did three years a month or so for maybe some tax issues. I assume he fees that he did things wrong but then at the same time, many leaders in Americas did the same thing and yet they were never indicted. Ann Curry is on to reconfirm that there will be some type of an agreement. But, there will most likely not be a deal closed today. There were negotiations accomplished all nigyht long. I wonder if the Russian representative came back to them. She also reconfirms some key issues which are what will happen with regard to Iran's research and development after ten years and in between say 11 years from now and 15 years from now. What happens between now and in ten years seemed to be agreed upon and resolved today. Then, it seems like they still do NOT know what will happen with regard to UN sanctions. Most other sanctions are agreed upon it seems. The UN sanctions are the critical element as of now. Regardless of it all, Stay in touch today!
