THIS JUST IN! CRANKY CLINTON WILL ALWAYS HAVE JIMMY CRACK CORN!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

AS CRANKY CLINTON AND HER E-MAIL SCANDAL CONTINUE TO IMPLODE, IT'S JIMMY CRACK CORN TO THE . . . RESCUE?

JIMMY CRACK CORN TENDS TO EXPLODE LIKE POP CORN WHEN CHALLENGED ON THE CLAIM THAT HILLARY CLINTON DOES NOT WALK ON WATER BUT HE REALLY EXPLODES WHEN PEOPLE SUGGEST THAT HER DISHONESTY MIGHT BE SOMETHING OTHER THAN A PATTERN OF WHITE LIES INTENDED TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER AND MORE PEACEFUL PLACE.


JIMMY CRACK CORN CARVILLE SPOKE TO THESE REPORTERS TODAY. 

RUSH TRANSCRIPT.


US: GOOD MORNING, MR. CARVILLE.

JIMMY CRACK CORN: OF COURSE IT'S A GOOD MORNING AND LET ME TELL YOU SOMETHING, HILLARY WILL MAKE IT EVEN BETTER.

US: IN WHAT WAY?

JIMMY CRACK CORN: ARE YOU DOUBTING HILLARY?  LAST PERSON I KNOW WHO DOUBTED HILLARY ENDED UP A MASSIVE FAILURE.  YOU THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO SAY 'DEAD ON AN ARKANSAS AIRFIELD,'; DIDN'T YOU?  WELL HILLARY KILLS NOTHING BUT THE COMPETITION!  HILLARY CAN TAKE ON ANYONE AND WILL!  AND SHE FIGHTS HER OWN BATTLES! AND I'LL GUT PUNCH ANYONE WHO SAYS OTHERWISE!  EVEN MY OWN WIFE!



JIMMY CRACK CORN THEN RUSHED OFF TO ARGUE ON A PLAYGROUND WITH 2 KIDS OVER WHO HAD THE SWING NEXT, INSISTING, "HILLARY ALWAYS HAS THE SWING NEXT, YOU LITTLE PUNKS!"



FROM THE TCI WIRE:




The US government has been seeking a treaty with the Iranian government.


Some would have you believe the moment arrived today.


US Secretary of State John Kerry:  We, our P5+1, EU partners, and Iran have arrived at a consensus on the key parameters of an arrangement that, once implemented, will give the international community confidence that Iran’s nuclear program is and will remain exclusively peaceful. And over the coming weeks, with all of the conditions of the 2013 Joint Plan of Action still in effect from this moment forward, our experts will continue to work hard to build on the parameters that we have arrived at today and finalize a comprehensive deal by the end of June.


Did you follow that?

Because a lot of people -- including supposed journalists -- did not.

There is no deal.

Parameters of a deal?

That's not a deal.

The negotiations will continue.

They may or may not lead to a deal.

Cedric and Wally grasped that this afternoon "Barry calls a maybe 'historic'" and "THIS JUST IN! ALL HAIL THE MAYBE HISTORIC DEAL THAT MIGHT BE REACHED IN 3 MONTHS! OR NOT!" joint-post:

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS HAILING AS HISTORIC A NEW AGREEMENT WITH IRAN THAT . . . 

. . . MIGHT . . .

. . . BE REACHED . . .

. . . IN . . .

. . . THREE MONTHS . . .

YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE MIGHT HAPPEN IN 3 MONTHS?

YOU MIGHT WIN THE LOTTERY!'


OF COURSE, THERE'S A CHANCE YOU ALSO MIGHT NOT WIN IT.


THAT'S THE THING ABOUT STUFF THREE MONTHS FROM NOW, YOU NEVER KNOW IF IT WILL COME TO PASS.


On The NewsHour (PBS -- link is video, text and audio), Judy Woodruff put it this way, "The United States and five other nations say they have achieved a political framework for a final agreement with Iran."

Again to John Kerry:


US Secretary of State John Kerry:  Our political understanding arrived at today opens the door for a long-term resolution to the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. Now, we have no illusions about the fact that we still have a ways to travel before we’ll arrive at the destination that we seek. We still have many technical details to work out on both sides and still some other issues that we acknowledge still have to be resolved; for example, the duration of the UN arms and ballistic missile restrictions on Iran and the precise timing of and mechanism for the conversion of the Arak reactor and Fordow site. And of course, once we’re able to finalize a comprehensive deal, the process of implementation then remains in front of us as well. But that’s a good challenge to have, frankly.



There is no deal.

There may be one at some point.

There's not one now.

I'm real sorry to be the one to tell Phyllis Bennis to put the vibrator down and stop shrieking in ecstasy but someone has to.


Phyllis can take comfort in the fact that her public madness has been trumped.


No, Phyllis is many things (a number of them good) but she is never trash.

Trash wrote this:

The deal recently concluded between Iran and the so-called "P-5 plus 1" nations (the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany) is designed to prevent Iran from being able to rapidly acquire fissile material in quantities suitable for use in a nuclear weapon. According to President Obama, the agreement is a "good deal" that "shuts down Iran's path to a bomb." The devil is in the details, of course, which won't be finalized until June 30,

I didn't realize trash was out of prison.

Turns out, he got paroled back in December.



Arianna allowed her website -- bearing her name -- to publish those scribbles by that piece of trash.


The Huffington Post offers this tagline to the column:

Scott Ritter served as a weapons inspector for the United Nations in Iraq from 1991-1998 and is the author of Target Iran published by Nation Books.


It should include that he "was convicted of six counts, including felony unlawful contact with a minor.  Sentenced to up to five and half years, he was sent to Laurel Highlands state prison in Somerset County, Pa., in March 2012."  And he served 2 years and 9 months before being paroled.


Scott Ritter is filth.  He's a sex offender who supposed to be getting treatment as part of his parole.  I wonder how writing -- which will surely lead to speaking -- is supposed to protect anyone because he's not supposed to have contact with underage females.


I don't understand.

He gets a pass because he's a White man?

He's a convicted pedophile.

Arrested multiple times and convicted.

No one should publish his 'writing.'  It's dull and plodding.

But if it is to be published, it needs to be published with a notice that he's a convicted predator.

Long before the conviction, years before, we took a strong stand against Scott Ritter and the people who enabled him.

We noted that Katrina vanden Heuvel would feel less inclined to publish him if it was her teenage daughter he was targeting.  We noted Amy Goodman's stamp of approval could enable him to continue the behavior and she'd be responsible if some young girl was harmed.

They enabled him.

They lied for him.

They insisted that there was a conspiracy against him.

There was no conspiracy, Ritter was not innocent.

He was a predator and he got caught yet again.

And this time he got convicted.

There is no reason to publish his writing.

But those stupid enough to do so need to identify him as a predator.

Those stupid enough to publish him make clear that (a) they don't value the safety of women and girls and (b) they think when a predator is White you give him a pass.

He has nothing of value to offer.

And that's demonstrated by the fact that he's writing about a deal that's done when it's not done.

Christopher Dickey and Tim Mak (Daily Beast) explain:


But Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry, and Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif all emphasized a basic truth: the deal’s not done yet, and while what came out of Lausanne was a better and more complete framework than many diplomats expected when they went in, nothing has been signed, sealed and delivered.
It will be a miracle, in fact, if the deal outlined today can be wrapped up by the end of June, the deadline that’s been announced. Not only are the technical details to be resolved enormous and complicated, attacks on the whole process are likely to be relentless.




RECOMMENDED:   "Iraq snapshot"
"IAVA Launches Veteran Mental Health Awareness Camp..."
"Post-Tikrit 'liberation,' more of the same in Iraq..."

"Arrow -- how does the Atom shrink"
"The militias are not an answer for Iraq"
"Justin Raimondo goes for Idiot of the Week"
"The chart"
"There is no deal"
"good reading?"
"Martin O'Malley"
"Laura Nyro"
"Kenya"
"Natalie and Steve"
"Barry calls a maybe 'historic'"
"THIS JUST IN! ALL HAIL THE MAYBE HISTORIC DEAL THAT MIGHT BE REACHED IN 3 MONTHS! OR NOT!"

•  

THIS JUST IN! ALL HAIL THE MAYBE HISTORIC DEAL THAT MIGHT BE REACHED IN 3 MONTHS! OR NOT!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

FADED CELEBRITY IN CHIEF BARRY O IS HAILING AS HISTORIC A NEW AGREEMENT WITH IRAN THAT . . . 

. . . MIGHT . . .

. . . BE REACHED . . .

. . . IN . . .

. . . THREE MONTHS . . .

YOU KNOW WHAT ELSE MIGHT HAPPEN IN 3 MONTHS?

YOU MIGHT WIN THE LOTTERY!'


OF COURSE, THERE'S A CHANCE YOU ALSO MIGHT NOT WIN IT.


THAT'S THE THING ABOUT STUFF THREE MONTHS FROM NOW, YOU NEVER KNOW IF IT WILL COME TO PASS.





FROM THE TCI WIRE:



There's still no deal with Iran though the US government continues dithering at the table despite swearing they'd walk away on Tuesday if there was no deal.

Does it matter?

Columnist Mubarak Al Duwailah (Qatar's The Peninsula) thinks so:

Look at what is happening around us! What is stopping America from checking the Iranian expansion in Iraq? What is preventing America from putting an end to the persecution of Sunnis in Iraq? Why doesn’t America stop the forced displacement of Arabs in Iraq from their cities and neighbourhoods? Why does the West, under American leadership, let Iran and Hezbollah support Bashar Al Assad’s regime?


Yeah, it matters.

And when members of the US Congress begin focusing on the latest assault on the Ashraf community in Iraq, it's going to matter a lot more.

 Tina shokohi ‏@Setarehgan 23h23 hours ago

.@BarackObama #Irantalks should not mean bargain on human lives #freeZakeri@Statedept @UN #humanrightsdefender

View photo 33 retweets 20 favorites 

Shahriar Kia (News Blaze) explains:


On Monday, 16 March 2015, Mr. Safar Zakery, a truck driver and a member of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran residing in Camp Liberty near Baghdad International Airport, was hit by an Iraq SWAT Humvee in a suspicious road accident. Traffic police at the site to investigate the matter immediately said the SWAT Humvee was responsible for the accident.
Despite the fact that Safar Zakery was innocent, the Karkh investigative court - under the influence of three Iraqi army intelligence officers in contact with the Iranian regime's embassy and in charge of Camp Liberty's management team - had Mr. Zakery illegally arrested and imprisoned.

The illegal arrest and continued detention of Safar Zakery are under orders issued by Iraqi national security advisor Falih Fayyadh. He is implementing his policies through his three agents by the names of Sadeq Mohamed Kadhem, Major Ahmed Khozeir and Captain Heidar Azzab Mashi, all having major roles in the crackdown and massacre of Ashraf and Liberty residents from 2009 onward.


We're going to go into the Ashraf community at length in one of the next two snapshots.  For now, we'll note that Baghdad remains a puppet of Tehran when it comes to the Ashraf community.

And we'll note that Congress doesn't care for the White House's excuses and Brett McGurk, awhile back, was able to spin Congress to a degree on Ashraf but they've since woken up to his lies and know that he is not to be trusted on this issue.


And if you need another real world implication from the never-ending and over-the-barrel 'negotiations,' right at this moment is that the US State Dept is paralyzed to the point that it can't even handle a daily press briefing.

For the second day in a row, the State Dept was unable to pull off a press briefing.

If they can't handle something that basic, should we expect anything out of them?


Not everyone's silent.


"Here we come to you, Anbar! Here we come to you, Nineveh, and we say it with full resolution, confidence, and persistence."

That's Iraq's Minister of Defense Khalid al-Obeidi as quoted by the AP.


And yes, he does sound a bit like Howard Dean.

AP notes he dubbed today in Tikrit a "magnificent victory."

They're far too kind to note that yesterday was also dubbed a victory.

BBC News does note that, claims aside, "Troops are still fighting to clear the last remaining IS holdout in the city, but Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi was filmed raising an Iraqi flag there."





RECOMMENDED:  "Iraq snapshot"
"Federal Court Rules for Indian Families in ACLU La..."
"Tikrit -- like that political solution -- still n..."
"Cracker Dicks Medea Benjamin and Katie Powers"
"The Arrow"
"O'Malley"
"Jill Stein? Really?"
"they keep putting more make up on her and her ratings keep falling"
"It's just embarrassing"
"MSNBC?"
"Crooked Lois Lerner limps away"
"Interesting Tweet"
"Taylor Swift?"
"Cranky's all about the Chicago way"
"THIS JUST IN! HILLARY WAS BORN INTO THE CHICAGO WAY!"

•  

THIS JUST IN! HILLARY WAS BORN INTO THE CHICAGO WAY!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE


NPR'S PUT ON THEIR BEST -- AND HEAVIEST SHOULDER-PADDED -- PANTS SUIT TO INSIST THAT CRANKY CLINTON'S E-MAIL SCANDAL WAS NOT EFFECTING HER DOGGED PURSUIT OF THE WHITE HOUSE.

WE HAVE NO IDEA HOW MANY TAX DOLLARS NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO SPENDS ON THEIR STASH BUT WE CAN REPORT IT'S GOT A LOT OF RESIN AND GETS THEM REALLY BAKED.

WHICH IS WHY THEY MISSED THE STORY.

CRANKY CLINTON'S E-MAIL SCANDAL IS EFFECTING HER POLLS AND STRONG LEADS HAVE SHRUNK.

REACHED FOR COMMENT THIS AFTERNOON BY THESE REPORTERS, CRANKY DISMISSED THE POLLS, "WHAT DO I CARE ABOUT POLLS?  I WANT VOTES!  AND I KNOW WHERE TO BUY THEM.  REMEMBER, I'M FROM CHICAGO -- BORN AND BRED -- AND IF THERE'S ONE THING WE LEARN THERE IT'S HOW TO STEAL AN ELECTION."



FROM THE TCI WIRE:



He can always point to Barack Obama who looks even more foolish.

"Without preconditions," then-US Senator Barack insisted of his planned talks with Iran should he be elected US president.

Apparently, he also meant to say "without time limitations."

He has wasted years on negotiations with Iran.

And, yes "wasted" is the term.

The deadline for his hoped for deal -- details to come, as always, after a deal had been negotiated -- came and went.

And still the US is engaged in negotiations.

This is stupidity beyond belief and why so many are so bothered by Barack.


As we noted March 22nd:

Democratic leadership in the Senate has made clear to Barack that, if there's a deal to make with Iran, he needs to make it already.
Not only has his dilly-dallying on a treaty harmed Iraq, it's also harming the image of the United States which is beginning to appear as indecisive as Barack himself.  (That was the point Harry Reid was conveying to the White House last week.)


The United States looks very weak now.

Today was the deadline and the deadline passed but negotiations continued.


The power of no.

You have to be willing to walk away.

If you're not willing to walk away, they own you.

In the entertainment industry, we know our "no" is as powerful as our "yes."

And we know we need to be prepared to say "no."

Debra Winger's made a career out of saying "no" better than anyone.  Bill Murray has a film career -- something none of his SNL peers can't claim -- because he has always understood the power of "no."

You have to be willing to walk away.

And that may mean you lose out on something but it also means, in the next negotiation, people know you're not going to cave.

There was never any reason to waste so much time on one deal (with anyone, leave Iran out of it for now).

There was no reason when issues still remained unresolved to bring Barack into publicly.

You keep the president out of the negotiations publicly until the deal is set and that's when he or she swoops in to look like the gifted and talented.

Instead it looks like yet another failure by Team Barack -- like the failed bid to get the Olympics in Chicago, remember that?

When the time ran out, the US should have walked away from the table.

That wouldn't mean an end to talks.

24 hours later, the talks could be restarted for whatever reason.

But you make the point that you will walk away.

And if you fail to make that point, no one takes you seriously.

Nor should they.

In addition, by staying in negotiations after the deadline passed, the US showed their hand.  There's no more bluffing.  Clearly the deal is more important to the US than it is to Ian.  All future negotiations will be the US government speaking from a position of weakness.


Now in terms of Iran . . .

As Betty noted, the most likely outcome of a deal with Iran was a contract that would be used for war.  That is what tends to happen in the last two decades when leaders of foreign countries make concessions to the US government -- see Saddam Hussein (letting the inspectors back in) and Muammar Gaddafi (agreeing to demands of Bully Boy Bush only to be targeted shortly after by Barack).

In terms of Iran and Iraq, the White House has failed.

It has failed to speak up for the Sunni population, to condemn attacks on them, etc.

It's done so to avoid angering the government in Iran.

Iran's led Barack around on all fours by a ring in his nose for the last year.

And the result is that the US remained silent on the abuses of Iraqi forces, the War Crimes.

We noted the horror of a Sunni man being set on fire by Iraqi forces.  More recently there was the 11-year-old boy shot dead by Iraqi forces.  Those were caught on video.



Iraqi Spring MC posted a video today.





Watch how the Iraqi forces treat a citizen they've detained.

Grasp that they do this knowing they are recording one another.

They stroke and play with the man's beard in a manner that is the behavior of a predator.

They slap him and hit him repeatedly.

This is a civilian.  A Sunni civilian, so he doesn't matter to the forces, but the man is a civilian.

And for their amusement, they hit him.  Repeatedly.


The same State Dept that condemns this and that action in other countries -- or when carried out by the Islamic State -- has been silent.

The consensus among members of Congress has been that the White House didn't (a) want to risk pushing Iraq closer to Iran and (b) didn't want to risk angering Iran (which supplies, trains and supports many of the thugs in Iraq) in the midst of (never-ending) negotiations.

Now maybe members of Congress are wrong.

Maybe even without the pursuit of an Iran deal, Barack would have remained silent about the abuses in Iraq?

He certainly stayed silent from 2010 through 2014 (Nouri's second term) until June.  This was after the exposure of torture chambers and the Iraqi forces murdering peaceful protesters and so much more.  Barack stayed silent throughout all of that.


That silence prompted this.

   

March 15, 2013, Iraqis in Samarra with a message for the world (photo via Iraqi Spring MC) asked "Obama, If you Cannot Hear Us Can you Not See Us?" 

Iraqis were well aware that, while they were targeted, the US government was silent.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Iraq's a bit more than Tikrit (as abuse in Anbar m..."

"Hillary and her many lies"
"Shirley MacLaine and Hawkgirl"
"Joni"
"The cowards"
"Jodie"
"revenge (the big yawn)"
"Iraq"
"Slippery Hillary"
"The never-ending Iraq War"
"No one needed that musical"
"It's their fault for believing her"
"THIS JUST IN! CRANKY CLINTON DIDN'T EXPECT ANYONE TO ACTUALLY BELIEVE HER!"

•  

•  
   
   
   

THIS JUST IN! CRANKY CLINTON DIDN'T EXPECT ANYONE TO ACTUALLY BELIEVE HER!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE

CRANKY CLINTON GOT CAUGHT IN YET ANOTHER LIE.

CRANKY INSISTED -- LIED! -- THAT SHE USED HER OWN PRIVATE E-MAIL INSTEAD OF A GOVERNMENT E-MAIL WHILE SECRETARY OF STATE BECAUSE SHE DID ALL OF HER E-MAILING ON HER BLACKBERRY AND, DAMN IT, IT WOULD ONLY HANDLE ONE E-MAIL.

BUT NOW IT TURNS OUT THAT THIS WAS A LIE.

CRANKY USED A BLACKBERRY AND AN iPAD.

REACHED FOR COMMENT, CRANKY EXCLAIMED, "GIVE ME A F-TO-THE-YUCK ALREADY!  NO ONE LISTENING TO ME REALLY THOUGHT I WAS TELLING THE TRUTH.  I AM KNOWN FOR MY CREATIVE WORD PLAY!"




FROM THE TCI WIRE:


Today, US Secretary of Defense Ash Carter spoke to troops at Fort Drum.  Among his statements? "And some of you, and this is important, will be going to Iraq. And there to train, advise and assist the Iraqi security forces so that they can be the force that sustained the defeat of ISIL after ISIL is defeated, which it will be. But in order to sustain that defeat, we need a force on the ground and that's what you'll be helping to create."

Andrew Tilghman and Michelle Tan (Army Times) note the number deploying is "about 1,250 soldiers from the 10th Mountain Division."  Gordon Block (Watertown Daily Times) notes the deployment will take place "around August."


Under Bully Boy Bush, the peace movement was disturbed by announced deployments.

Under Barack Obama?

It's a 'Eh, is American Idol on?"

You have to drop back, for example, to March 26th on CodeStink's Twitter feed to find a Tweet about Iraq,


Or, to put it another way, you have to wade through 36 Tweets right now before getting to Tweet 37 which notes Iraq.


They have no Tweet about the deployment.

They have no Tweet of any consequence.


Yet they claim to be against the Iraq War.



Meanwhile, the assault on Tikrit continues and Nabih Bulos (Los Angeles Times) reports, "Shiite Muslim militias on Monday rejoined Iraqi government forces in their battle to gain control of the strategic central city of Tikrit, after a four-day retreat to protest a U.S.-led coalition's intervention in the campaign."

As we noted last Friday, either the Iranian government told the militias to pull out (only a third apparently did) or the US government did.

But now they're back.

And remember that visit to Fort Drum by Ash Carter today?

Lolita C. Baldor (AP) notes he declared that "the U.S. will continue to insist that Iranian-backed Shiite militias not participate."

Someone apparently forgot to brief Carter on the latest development before he spoke.

They also apparently forgot to brief him on another detail.  Jason Ditz (Antiwar.com) reports, "Leaders from multiple major Shi’ite militias in Iraq claim to have been given assurances by Prime Minister Abadi that the United States is going to halt airstrikes against the ISIS-held city of Tikrit, allowing them to sweep in and conquer it."


While Baghdad officials have insisted that progress will be swift, Al Mada reports that local officials in Salhuddin Province declared yesterday that the progress would be slow.  All Iraq News adds that Iraqi forces today "raised the Iraqi flag over Tikrit hospital."  Press TV states that the Grand Mosque of Tikrit was also re-taken by Iraqi forces.   Hamdi Alkhshali (CNN) reports, "The gains, according to the official, came after a slow advance into the city as the forces dealt with more than 300 improvised explosive devices planted in the city's streets. At least 26 militants were killed in the operation, the official said."

Sunday, Maria Fantappie and Peter Harling's "If Shi'ite militias beat Islamic State in Tikrit, Iraq will still lose" (Reuters) observed:

The military campaign is thus exacerbating the sense of powerlessness, disenfranchisement and humiliation among Sunni Arabs that gave rise to Islamic State.
The growing tendency in Baghdad and the south to equate Shi’ite militias with the national army, to declare oneself a patriot while expressing gratitude to Iran for its intervention, and to subsume national symbols under Shi’ite ones — with black, yellow and green flags referring to Hussein ibn Ali ibn Abi Taleb, Shiism’s third Imam, increasingly crowding out the Iraqi flag — is reshaping Iraqis’ national identity in ways that will vastly complicate well-intentioned efforts to advance inclusive politics and governance.

The editorial board of the New York Times noted last week:

The overwhelmingly Shiite ground forces battling ISIS in Sunni Tikrit have become increasingly powerful as the government army has disintegrated. The militias have a brutal record of sectarian bloodletting, including burning and bulldozing thousands of homes and other buildings in dozens of Sunni villages after American airstrikes drove ISIS out of the town of Amerli in northeastern Iraq last summer. If that happened in Tikrit, the United States would be blamed for helping to trigger yet another cycle of horrific sectarian violence.

Concerns are rightly building because there's no progress on political solutions in Iraq.

This despite Barack declaring last June that a political solution was the only solution for Iraq's various crises which threaten Iraq and threaten the region.

And these concerns take us into what was probably the biggest story out of Iraq today, we'll note this Tweet.

UN Spokesperson @UN_Spokesperson  ·  2h 2 hours ago

#UNSG urges Iraq 2 do all it can to ensure protection of civilians & humanitarian access in conflict zones. @UNIraq

United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon visited Baghdad today.


And his remarks were news.

Unless you were at today's State Dept's press briefing.

Not one reporter or 'reporter' bothered to note that Ban Ki-moon was in Iraq, let alone his remarks.

It wasn't news to anyone in the room and spokesperson Marie Harf certainly didn't bring up the topic.

Al Arabiya English @AlArabiya_Eng  ·  39m 39 minutes ago

BREAKING: U.N. Secretary General: Concerned about alleged summary executions and torture by pro-government forces in #Iraq

19 retweets 5 favorites

Ned Parker and John Stonestreet (Reuters) quote the Secretary-General, "I am... concerned by allegations of summary killings, abductions and destruction of property perpetrated by forces and militias fighting alongside Iraqi armed forces,"  Ned Parker and Crispian Balmer (Reuters) offer a longer report here.  Rod Nordland covers Ban Ki-moon's remarks for the New York Times here.  RTT covers it here.






RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"
"Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "Uncle Joe's Lo..."
"Media Advisory: IAVA Builds Community at (the Mond..."
"UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon's remarks to the ..."
"UN's Ban Ki-Moon in Baghdad notes allegations of a..."
"Hejira"
"Richard Diebenkorn's paintings capture a fresh and..."
"TV beef"
"Hawkgirl"
"Does Hillary ever stop lying?"
"The depressed electorate"
"The Originals"
"This year's music"
"The scandal of Scandal"
"revenge (yeah, i was right about louise)"
"Kevin Hart bombs again"
"The Wiz"

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: What's the cost, what's the exit strate...
• TV: When a show runner is a show ruiner
• Killing the Message and the Messenger
• The hardest working member of Congress?
• Oh, Mary Sue, really?
• The tabloid future?
• This edition's playlist
• Isakson, Blumenthal Statement on VA’s Expansion of...
• Media Advisory: IAVA Builds Community at Boston Ve...
• Richard Diebenkorn's paintings capture a fresh and...
• Michigan Greens Renew Call to Decommission Line 5,...
• Highlights

"Cranky argues for the need to wipe"

"THIS JUST IN! CRANKY WIPES AND FLUSHES!"

THIS JUST IN! CRANKY WIPES AND FLUSHES!

BULLY BOY PRESS &    CEDRIC'S BIG MIX -- THE KOOL AID TABLE 

CRANKY CLINTON IS IN THE MIDST OF ANOTHER FIRESTORM AS REVELATIONS EMERGE THAT NOT ONLY DID SHE REFUSE TO TURN OVER E-MAILS TO THE STATE DEPARTMENT FOR THEM TO DETERMINE WHAT WAS OFFICIAL BUSINESS AND WHAT WAS PERSON DURING HER TIME AS SECRETARY OF STATE (WHEN SHE REFUSED TO USE A GOVERNMENT E-MAIL WHICH WOULD HAVE RECORDED ALL OF HER E-MAILS FOR THE HISTORIC RECORD), BUT DESPITE THE STATE DEPARTMENT HAVING ASKED HER TO TURN OVER ALL E-MAILS LATE LAST FALL, SHE DID NOT.

NOT ONLY DID SHE REFUSE TO TURN THEM OVER, IT HAS EMERGED THAT SHE ALSO WIPED HER SERVER POSSIBLY MAKING WHAT WAS ON IT LOST FOREVER.

REACHED FOR COMMENT BY THESE REPORTERS LATE TONIGHT, CRANKY CLINTON REPLIED, "OF COURSE I WIPED!  WHAT KIND OF HUMAN BEING WOULD I BE IF I DIDN'T WIPE! I ALSO FLUSH!"

WITH THAT, CRANKY HUNG UP.

FROM THE TCI WIRE:

Amira El-Fekki (DNE) reports:

Egypt announced its support for UN efforts to seek a political solution to the conflict in Libya, yet warned of the possible ‘lengthy’ time period needed for peaceful negotiations to conclude.

“We cannot ask the Libyan people to endure the fire of terrorism until a political solution is reached,” President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi said Saturday, in his opening speech at the Arab League Summit in Sharm El-Sheikh. 

The Libyan people shouldn't have to, no.  But haven't the Iraqi people been forced to?

And not just for a few months or even for a year but for years -- plural.

The US government (under Bully Boy Bush) demanded in 2006 that Nouri al-Maliki be made prime minister.  From 2006 through 2010, he accomplished nothing and his failures were somewhat hidden by the fact that US boots were on the ground.  They were misused, to be sure.  They were used to provide stability for a government that was non-inclusive and that was accomplishing nothing.  The 'surge,' you may remember, was supposed to be the US troops providing stability and security which would free up the Iraqi government to focus on the political process.  While the US military carried out their task, Nouri failed at his.

By 2010, Nouri was a divisive figure whose failures were welol known -- as were his secret prisons where he torured people.  In March 2010, the Iraqi people voted for Iraqiya ahead of Nouri's State of Law.  This was the Iraqi voters choosing a national unity and a national identity and rising above thug Nouri's sectarian policies.  Iraqiya was welcoming to all Iraqis, representing men and women, Shi'ites, Sunnis, Kurds and various religious and ethnic minorities.

Even the Bully Boy Bush administration -- one not known for keen insights or even basic smarts -- would have realized this was a move to be backed up and endorsed.

But they didn't promise to pull out all troops from Iraq.  Barack had.

And Samantha Power and others insisted that the deal they wanted (which was already a plan to keep a few thousand troops in Iraq) could only be pulled off with the support of Nouri.

The CIA profile on Nouri in February of 2006 had noted Nouri's intense paranoia and this was seen as an asset, a way that the US government could control him.

In 2010, Samantha Power made a similar argument: Barack should back Nouri because Nouri was so divisive and unpopular and he would need American support to remain in office so they could leverage that support to get what they wanted from Nouri.  

So instead of supporting the Iraqi people, Barack backed Nouri.  And he had US officials in Iraq negotiate a contract -- The Erbil Agreement -- to give Nouri a second term.

The contract was nicely known as a power-sharing agreement.  And while that was one aspect of it, there was also the fact that that it was a bribe list.

Political leaders agreed to give Nouri a second term as prime minister and, in exchange, Nouri agreed to give them various things.  Ayad Allawi, leader of Iraqiya, would be put in charge of a national security commission, the Kurds would finally see Article 150 of the Iraqi Constitution implemented, etc.

And Nouri embraced the contract and was all for it.  To get his second term.

But he got named prime minister (designate) and said the contract would have to wait a bit -- the rest of it -- to be implemented.

That was November 2010.

He never implemented it.

He never honored the promises he made in that contract.

And as political parties demanded the contract be honored, the tensions grew and grew.

From 2010 through 2014, there was little concern about the terrorism the Iraqi people were living under.  The world turned a blind eye with few exceptions.  

When it became undeniable, the world paid attention long enough to see Barack finally pull the rug out from under despot Nouri al-Maliki and begin (publicly) sending US troops back into Iraq. 

Stepping onto the global stage last June, addressing the world, Barack declared that the only answer to Iraq's various crises was a political solution.

Where's that political solution?

Nearly a year later, where's that political solution?

Thursday, the House Foreign Affairs Committee held a hearing.  We covered some of it in that day's snapshot.  Today, we're focusing on the key concern of how the operation against the Islamic State is failing.  

Appearing before the Committee were the Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL John Allen as well as Brig Gen Michael Fantini and Brig Gen Gregg Olson.

John Allen is a retired general who, despite having taken a job of envoy which is under the State Dept, insists upon being called "General."  As a general rule, we go by what people call themselves here.

General rule.

There was a Rolling Stone employee who created a title for himself. 

The title didn't exist.

The New York Times ran with that title.

We did not.

When we gave his title, we gave the title that he actually had.  (And I told Jann Wenner what was going on and the employee was told to stick to the title he had which finally led the Times to use the correct title.  I also ratted out the stooge who went along with the RS employee -- NYT stooge who was the employee's friend -- to the paper and got the stooge packing.  Facts are facts, I don't tolerate lies and I don't tolerate them when press outlets try to claim "it's just entertainment coverage."  If it matters enough for you to cover it, it matters enough for you to cover it correctly.)

Allen is an envoy.  He is under the State Dept.  He is supposed to be heading Barack's diplomatic effort.

That makes him an envoy.

If that title is beneath him, and he acts as though it is, too bad.

John Allen has done an awful job as an envoy and possibly Barack, years from now, will be able to point to Allen's disaster moves to mitigate the blame he (Barack) faces for Iraq.

A diplomat was needed to work towards a political solution.

Instead of a diplomat, Barack appointed a retired general and one who has no sense of history or perspective on Iraq beyond bombs and guns.

John Allen started out an embarrassment, he's become an impediment.

Barack should find someone quickly to replace Allen and use it to create a "restart."  The latter would be especially helpful to him politically since June is approaching and his remarks from last year will be revisited then.

From Thursday's hearing, we'll note this exchange.

US House Rep Ted Deutch  I want to actually start with the news about our strikes in Tikrit.  The coverage in the New York Times today  included a paragraph which  said, "If the Americans did not engage they feared becoming marginalized by Tehran  in a country where they had spilled much blood in the last decade, the official said speaking on the condition of anonymity."  Is -- If you could speak to the strikes in Tikrit, the air support that the United States is providing, is it different than the support we've had in the past? And is it being offered in part because  there were concerns about being marginalized by the Iranians?  And in answering that question, it gets to the broader point of, again the same article "the preponderance of 30,000 fighters on the Iraqi side had been members of the militias fighting alongside the Iraqi military and police men.  Of those 30,000, how do we -- Gen Allen, following your last response -- how do we view it in a nuanced way to distinguish between the Iranian-backed militias and Sistani's popular mobilization forces?

Brig Gen Fat : Congressman, so I think the answer to your question is "no." We work by, with and through the Iraqi government.  And so through the Iraqi government and the Iraqi security forces, the-the, uh, the Iraqis came back and asked for support and we adjudicated that decision to the highest levels and decided to engage there.  It's within the Iraqi interest and the coalition's interest to be successful in Tikrit cause we don't want to have another success for Da'ash or ISIL. And, uh, we anticipate that the, uh, support that we're providing the Iraqi security forces with the Ministry of Defense, uh, in -- with the Ministry of Defense in in charge of the command and control of, uh, that operation that we're in a position where we can provide that support to be successful. 

US House Rep Ted Deutch: General Allen?

Envoy John Allen:  With regard to the command and control the, uh -- There's a difference between, uh, the role of the, uh, the traditional Shia elements that are aligned directly with Iraq and support directly with Iraq and those elements of the PMF that have provided, uh, uh, a larger force posture and a larger force generation capability, uh, they are not -- They don't intend to be or -- are not intended to be a permanent part of the Iraqi security force entity.  They are -- They are viewed as a temporary organization that have played the role ultimately of blunting and halting, uh, the forward progress of Da'ash.  And as we continue to build out the capabilities of the Iraqi security forces across the board and, uhm, we can provide you, I think, significant detail about the forces that are engaged right now in Tikrit.  It's-it's-it's actually quite encouraging.  Uhhhhh, to give you a sense of when the PMF elements are going to be in play and when they won't be in play -- and as we continue to force generate the regular forces they will play an increasing role ultimately in the counter-offensive to liberate the populations.

US House Rep Ted Deutch: General Allen, are you -- are you confident that the Iraqi people view this action in Tikrit as one taking place against ISIS by the United States through air strikes and Iraqi security forces or is it viewed as one that is a combination of US air strikes and Iranian-backed Shi'ite militias?

Envoy John Allen: Uh, that's a good question.  Uh, we've -- again from my time on the ground just last week there, uh, I made a point to meet with the provincial leadership in Salahuddin Province in which Tikrit is the largest population center.  Uh, at the time, the leadership in Salahuddin and-and even recently have talked about focusing on the liberation of Tikrit, uh, and have applauded the role of American forces in supporting the central government and the Iraqi security forces in liberating Tikrit from Da'ash.  So my sense is that on the ground in Salahuddin, their view is that the United States as we have done in other places, multiple other places in Iraq, are providing the kinds of both enabling to the use of information to command and control -- support to command and control -- and ultimately fire power that will facilitate the Iraqi government and the Iraqi security forces in accomplishing the mission of defeating Da'ash and liberating this population center.  So my sense is that at least the Sunni leadership --  key Sunni leadership -- the Speaker, the Vice President and others but also the Sunni leadership of Salahhudin have been clear that they support the role of the United States in this particular fight, sir.

Mr. Chairman, I just hope then that that translates down to the Iraqi people as well and I yield back.

We'll note another exchange from the hearing in a moment.

But first off, that's Speaker of Parliament who would be Salim al-Jabouri and Vice President Osama al-Nujafi.

As the chief US diplomat, Allen should know those names and titles.

 Allen doesn't have a clue.

RECOMMENDED: "Iraq snapshot"

"Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement"

"Media Advisory: IAVA Builds Community at Boston Ve..."

"Boasts can set one up for failure"

"The frenzy never ends"

"The So-Called Presidential Debate"

"Brown rice"

"hart of dixie"

"Paul Street's babbles"

"Idiot of the week"

"Lena Dunham: Grand Dragon of the KKK (with Mia Farrow backing her up)"

"The Slap (Rosie)"

"That's the problem? Seriously?"

"Oh, Hillary"

"The end of Wolverine?"

"Oh, Mary Sue, who did that to you?"

"THIS JUST IN! LOOK WHAT THEY'VE DONE TO THE MARY SUE!"