John Kerry

Kerry deflects question about why he released money to Iran, accused Trump of ‘lies’

Former Secretary of State John Kerry faced a question about his role in releasing billions of dollars to Iran during the Obama administration and responded by first attacking President Trump’s criticism of the move. President Trump has claimed that Iran’s recent aggression against the U.S. in Iraq was funded by $150 billion that the Obama administration gave to Iran. Kerry has insisted that was false, although in the past he recognized that at least some of the money – which was frozen due to sanctions and held in banks around the world before being released at roughly the same time the Iran nuclear deal was made – would end up in the hands of terrorists. “I think that some of it will end up in the hands of the IRGC or other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists,” Kerry told CNBC in 2016. When asked by Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation” why he believed this was a worthwhile risk when releasing the money, Kerry attacked the president rather than answer the question. “You know that the president’s tweet is a lie,” Kerry told host Margaret Brennan. “And the president tweeted this morning, because I am coming on the show and he knew you’d ask me the question or he’d push you in a place where you did ask the question. You and the media, I think, need to call a lie a lie.” Brennan immediately reminded him that she asked the same question in 2015. Kerry continued, saying that what he meant was that “clearly some money from the budget of Iran is going to go to the IRGC.” He then said that, contrary to what President Trump claims ”his own defense intelligence agency in 2017 testified to the Congress that very, very little money actually went to the IRGC at all.” Kerry did not explain his rationale for releasing the money at the time, before he knew where the funds would end up.

And to think this duplicitous, self-serving tool almost became President…    He and Obama orchestrated that more than $1 BILLION ransom deal with Iran during Obama’s administration.. And when confronted by a mainstream media journalist, Kerry pivots and somehow blames Trump, who wasn’t President at the time; Obama was.

John Kerry Meeting With Iran to Salvage Nuke Deal With Rogue Diplomacy

Former Secretary of State John Kerry disclosed that he has been conducting rogue diplomacy with top Iranian officials to salvage the landmark nuclear deal and push the Islamic Republic to negotiate its contested missile program, according to recent remarks. Kerry, in an interview with radio host Hugh Hewitt to promote his new book, said that he has met with Iranian Former Minister Javad Zarif—the former secretary’s onetime negotiating partner—three or four times in recent months behind the Trump administration’s back. “I think I’ve seen him three or four times,” Kerry said, adding that he has been conducting sensitive diplomacy without the current administration’s authorization. Kerry said he has criticized the current administration in these discussions, chiding it for not pursuing negotiations from Iran, despite the country’s fevered rhetoric about the U.S. president. Kerry’s comments are in line with previous reporting on his behind-the-scenes attempts to save the nuclear deal and ensure that Iran continues receiving billions in cash windfalls. These payments were brought to a halt by the Trump administration when it abandoned the nuclear agreement and reimposed harsh sanctions on Iran that have nearly toppled its economy and sparked a popular revolution. Kerry said he met Zarif in Norway, Munich, and other international forums. As Iran continues to plot terror attacks across the globe and transport weapons to regional hotspots in Syria and Yemen, Kerry has tried to help Zarif preserve the nuclear agreement with European nations. “What I have done is try to elicit from him [Zarif] what Iran might be willing to do to change the dynamic of the Middle East for the better,” Kerry said. “How does one resolve Yemen, what do you do to try and get peace in Syria? Those are the things that really are preoccupying him because those are the impediments to Iran’s ability to convince people its ready to embrace something different.” Kerry said he has offered blunt talk to Zarif in order to push the regime to accept restrictions on its foreign interventionism. “I’ve been very blunt to Foreign Minister Zarif. I told him, ‘Look, you guys need to recognize the world does not appreciate what’s happening with missiles, what’s happening with Hezbollah, what’s happening with Yemen,'” Kerry recounted. “You’re supporting an ongoing struggle there.” Iran has said “they’re prepared to negotiate and resolve these issues, but the [Trump] administration’s taken a very different tact.” Criticizing the current White House, Kerry lamented that “it appears right now, as if the administration is hell-bent … to pursue a regime change strategy” in Iran that would “bring the economy down and try to isolate further.” The former secretary of state cautioned the current administration, saying “the United States historically has not had a great record in regime change strategies, number one, and number two that makes it very difficult, if not impossible, for any Iranian leader to sit down and negotiate anything because they’re not going to do it in a capitulatory situation.” Iranian leaders have said multiple times in recent months that they will not take any meetings with Trump or his administration.

Just who the hell does FORMER Sec. of State John Kerry thinks he is?!?!  He has NO authority to be “negotiating” anything on behalf of the U.S.  So, don’t know what he hopes to achieve.  But, he’s doing it without the blessing of the ACTUAL (Trump) administration.  President Trump tore up the Iran nuke deal, as it was a complete disaster…which Obama never got the (Dem-controlled, no less) Senate to ratify anyway.  Either Kerry is trying to act as a shadow entity, or he’s simply an ivy-leage educated hippy who has gone crazy..

Kerry: Air conditioners as big a threat as ISIS

Secretary of State John Kerry said in Vienna on Friday that air conditioners and refrigerators are as big of a threat to life as the threat of terrorism posed by groups like the Islamic State. The Washington Examiner reported that Kerry was in Vienna to amend the 1987 Montreal Protocol that would phase out hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, from basic household and commercial appliances like air conditioners, refrigerators, and inhalers. “As we were working together on the challenge of [ISIS] and terrorism,” Kerry said. “It’s hard for some people to grasp it, but what we–you–are doing here right now is of equal importance because it has the ability to literally save life on the planet itself.” Kerry said that most of the substances banned in the Montreal Protocol have increased the use of HFCs and claimed that the coolant was thousands of times more potent than CO2. He added that the increase of HFCs has led to the trend of global climate change. “The use of hydrofluorocarbons is unfortunately growing,” Kerry said. “Already, the HFCs use in refrigerators, air conditioners, and other items are emitting an entire gigaton of carbon dioxide-equivalent pollution into the atmosphere annually. Now, if that sounds like a lot, my friends, it’s because it is. It’s the equivalent to emissions from nearly 300 coal-fired power plants every single year.” Members of the Montreal Protocol have met their obligations and have aided in the shrinking of the hole in the ozone, as well as created jobs and improved the quality of life, Kerry said. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy was also present at the negotiations and is serving as the lead negotiator for the United States. McCarthy has said that her goal is to enact the HFC agreement by the end of the year. New EPA rules along with the global deal would band HFCs in the United States and push for alternative chemicals for use in appliances. The negotiations are part of President Obama’s climate agenda to combat global climate change.

Just think..  Sec. John Kerry (D) actually believes that the air conditioner in your car, or home, is more deadly than ISIS. It’s hard to believe that such a “glittering jewel of colossal ignorance” is in such a position of power.  Be afraid.  That said, I’m willing to bet he hasn’t turned off the A/C in his limo or office…or home.   What a tool…

Kerry declares ISIS committing genocide against Christians, others

Secretary of State John Kerry declared Thursday that the Islamic State is committing genocide against Christians and other minorities in the Middle East, after facing heavy pressure from lawmakers and rights groups to make the rare designation. “In my judgment, Daesh is responsible for genocide against groups in territory under its control, including Yazidis, Christians and Shia Muslims,” Kerry said at the State Department, referring to the terror group by an adapted acronym of its Arabic name. He accused ISIS of “crimes against humanity” and “ethnic cleansing.” The announcement was a surprise, at least in terms of the timing. A day earlier, a State Department spokesman said they would miss a congressionally mandated March 17 deadline to make a decision. Yet as the department took heat from lawmakers for the expected delay, the department confirmed Thursday morning that Kerry had reached the decision that Christians, Yazidis and Shiite groups are victims of genocide. It comes after the House this week passed a nonbinding resolution by a 393-0 vote condemning ISIS atrocities as genocide. Kerry’s finding will not obligate the United States to take additional action against ISIS militants and does not prejudge any prosecution against its members, said U.S. officials. Kerry, though, urged others to join in holding the group “accountable”; he called for an “independent investigation” as well as a court or tribunal to take action to that end. Saying the terror network is “genocidal” in what it says, believes and does, Kerry recited a litany of documented atrocities including the execution of Christians in Iraq “solely because of their faith” and of Yazidis. Lawmakers and others who have advocated for the finding had sharply criticized the department’s disclosure Wednesday that the deadline would be missed. The officials said Kerry concluded his review just hours after that announcement and that the criticism had not affected his decision. “Secretary Kerry is finally making the right call,” House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, R-Calif., said in a statement after the announcement Thursday. He added that “President Obama should step up and lay out the broad, overarching plan that’s needed to actually defeat and destroy ISIS. This administration’s long pattern of paralysis and ineffectiveness in combating these radical Islamist terrorists is unacceptable.” The determination marks only the second time a U.S. administration has declared that a genocide was being committed during an ongoing conflict. The first was in 2004, when then-Secretary of State Colin Powell determined that atrocities in Sudan’s Darfur region constituted genocide. Powell reached that determination amid much lobbying from human rights groups, but only after State Department lawyers advised him that it would not — contrary to legal advice offered to previous administrations — obligate the United States to act to stop it. In that case, the lawyers decided that the 1948 U.N. Convention against genocide did not require countries to prevent genocide from taking place outside their territory. Powell instead called for the U.N. Security Council to appoint a commission to investigate and take appropriate legal action if it agreed with the genocide determination. The officials said Kerry’s determination followed a similar finding by department lawyers.

Moscow admits Russian military experts on the ground in Syria

Russia’s Foreign Ministry disclosed early Wednesday that Russian military experts are assisting forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in that country’s long-running civil war. The statement by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova to Reuters marks the first confirmation from Moscow that members of the Russian military are on the ground in Syria after weeks of reports that Russia had stepped up its support for the embattled Assad regime. Zakharova said the advisers were assisting with Russian arms deliveries to Syrian government forces, which Moscow says are aimed at fighting Islamist militants. The spokeswoman did not give a precise number of Russian military personnel in Syria. The disclosure comes as U.S. officials have expressed increasing concern about the number of Russian military cargo flights to Syria. Secretary of State John Kerry called his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov over the weekend to voice “concerns” about the “imminent” buildup of Russian military forces there. Multiple U.S. officials who have reviewed the latest intelligence in Syria told Fox News Tuesday that the U.S. military was tracking multiple flights of Russia’s largest military cargo plane, the Antonov An-124 Ruslan — better known by its NATO codename, “Condor.” Notably, the “Condor” made one flight Tuesday morning into Latakia, a Syrian port city along the Mediterranean Sea controlled by the Assad regime and home to Russian military forces.

Nothing new here, really… We ALL knew that Russia had troops on the ground in Syria, and that it is Moscow’s policy to prop up “Baby” Assad’s regime there. It’s just new that Moscow is finally admitting all of that. So much for Hillary and Obama’s failed “Reset” with mother Russia…

Official: Review of Cuba as terror sponsor in ‘final stages’

White House officials left open the possibility Tuesday that President Obama could recommend Cuba’s removal from a list of state sponsors of terror around the time of the Summit of the Americas later this week in Panama. The officials also sought to soften tensions with Venezuela that threatened to overshadow the summit. Deputy National Security adviser Benjamin Rhodes said the State Department’s review of Cuba’s place on that terror list is in “its final stages.” While he said the timing is in the hands of Secretary of State John Kerry, he would not rule out an Obama announcement before or during the two-day summit in Panama City. Removing Cuba from the terror list would be one of the biggest developments since Dec. 17, when Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro announced they would seek to re-establish diplomatic relations after half a century of antagonism. But Rhodes cautioned that the actual opening of embassies in Havana and in Washington by both countries was still some time off. “When you have two countries that haven’t spoken to each other like this over 50 years, you have lot off issues to work through,” Rhodes said in a call previewing Obama’s trip to Jamaica and then to the summit in Panama. Obama leaves for the Caribbean on Wednesday. Among the issues that have slowed the diplomatic efforts have been Cuba’s presence on the terror list and U.S. demands that U.S. diplomats be able to interact with the Cuban people without limitations. Rhodes also downplayed U.S. sanctions against certain Venezuelans in protest of President Nicolas Maduro’s crackdown on dissent. Maduro has characterized the sanctions against seven individuals as an act of aggression, citing language in an Obama executive order that describes Venezuela as a threat to U.S. security. Rhodes sought to tamp down the furor, noting that the language is boilerplate used in executive orders that impose sanctions around the world. “The U.S. doesn’t believe that Venezuela poses some threat to national security,” Rhodes said. The action, Rhodes said, “was not of a scale that in any way was aimed at targeting the Venezuelan government broadly.”

Sooo… In other words.. You just use foreign policy “templates;” one size fits all? Talk about tap dancing! And, this whole thing with Cuba stinks to high heaven. They have ALWAYS been, and continue to be, a state sponsor of terrorism around the world. That’s not even moot. But, Obama, who has a fetish for wanting to appease our enemies, is doing what he can to remove communist Cuba from that list…and begin normalizing relations with that evil, and oppressive, regime. Typical..

Opinion: A deal with Iran built on lies

Everything about the so-called deal with Iran, including the reputations of the men who negotiated it, is a lie. It’s likely to be a deadly lie for millions of people who will die on account of it. The world should mark well everyone responsible for it. The first lie is that an agreement for more talk is already “a deal.” So far the only agreement is to further pursue “a deal.” President Obama couldn’t wait to take a victory lap. But not even Mr. Obama, desperate to make something he can call “a deal,” says there’s an actual deal. Look closely at the slippery “clinton clauses,” as they were once called, in his announcement Thursday: “I am convinced that if this framework leads to a final comprehensive deal, it will make our country, our allies and our world safer.” That was Lie No. 2. There’s nothing in the “framework” that leads to a conclusion like that. The world won’t be safer, because when Iran gets the bomb — and there’s wide agreement that it’s not “if” but “when” — a half-dozen Islamic countries in the Middle East will start work on a bomb of their own. Saudi Arabia has already hinted that once it’s clear that America can’t be counted on to do what Mr. Obama emphatically said America would do, Saudi Arabia must do what it has to do. Survival makes its own rules. Once there’s an Iranian bomb, every crackpot mullah and deranged Islamic holy man will want one. Who’s to stop them? Israel? The situation by then will be so out of control that nobody could do what only a superpower could have done. The Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, wanted to say complicit things at a press conference in Lausanne on Thursday, but his carefully chosen words were revealing to anyone familiar with parsing words: “Our program is exclusively peaceful, has always been and always will remain exclusively peaceful.” (Lies No. 3, 4 and 5.) “We will continue enriching. We will continue research and development.” Secretary of State John F. Kerry, feeling his own nose growing longer by the hour, attempted to defend his compromises. “Simply demanding that Iran capitulate makes a nice sound bite,” he said, “but [a sound bite] is not a policy, it is not a realistic plan.” He should know. He doesn’t want anyone to remember Mr. Obama’s sound bite that Iran would never get a bomb of its own because he wouldn’t allow it. The Iranian foreign minister concedes that Iran is “still some way away from where we want to be.” No doubt. But he’s entitled to his satisfied mind. Relief from sanctions, and an easily frustrated inspection scheme, is exactly what the mullahs in Tehran set out to achieve. The only price they pay is to cooperate to enable the leaders in the West to pretend they have accomplished something they haven’t. Once the final agreement is in place, the mullahs can proceed to do what they will say they are not doing, until their bomb is real and they can use it at will. Islamic good faith is good enough for Mr. Obama, who has a soft spot in his heart for Islam. Islamic good faith is not good enough for the rest of us. The president is entitled to indulge that soft spot in his heart, but he is not entitled to indulge a soft spot in his head at the expense of the nation. He doesn’t have to be the secret Muslim some of his critics say he is to be a faithful guardian of the interests of the Islamic world. Describing Mr. Obama as an appeaser, in the tradition of Neville Chamberlain caving at a similar nexus of history in 1938, misses the point. Mr. Obama may not be appeasing at all, but enabling. Everything about Barack Obama suggests that he believes America must be cut down to size, that it’s the arrogance of thinking America is something special, the exceptional nation, that is the source of intractable trouble in the world. Once America is brought to heel, men of wisdom, brilliance, kindness, intelligence and good will — rare men just like himself — can make the rough places smooth and forge a lasting peace. These negotiations have exposed the president as few events have. “Mr. Obama,” says the New York Observer, no particular friend of Republicans and conservative critics of the president, “is an amateur who is enthralled with the sound of his own voice and incapable of coming to grips with the consequences of his actions. He is surrounded by sycophants, second-rate intellectuals and a media that remains compliant and uncritical.” History won’t be able to say it better.

Indeed! An outstanding op/ed by Wesley Pruden, who is usually very funny. But, today, his analysis is sobering….and should terrify every sane American. Obama, and that loser John Kerry, has sold America out. As we’ve been saying from day one here at The Daily Buzz.. The greatest national security threat to America, is Obama. This is the nail in the coffin.

Editorial: Surrender to Tehran

We now have a definitive answer to the oft-asked but hardly challenging question of whether President Obama wanted a deal with Iran so badly he would accept a truly awful bargain. The answer: Of course he did. Iranian negotiators have triumphed on nearly every substantive point: They will get complete sanctions relief and U.N. legitimacy all at once, while keeping thousands of centrifuges, multiple nuclear sites, the right to develop new, more advanced enrichment equipment — even permission to continue nuclear research at a highly reinforced underground facility that was kept secret from international inspectors for years. In exchange, the West got promises of a new, tough inspections regime, even though there is already a long record of Iran’s developing nuclear facilities in secret. The White House says the deal pushes the time it would take Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon to a year, but widely respected arms-control experts have said, given the difficulty of performing good inspections and of building consensus around violations, that this is not enough. The Iranians’ success has little to do with the ability of the Iranian negotiators and a lot to do with the Obama administration’s zeal for an agreement at any cost. The president wanted a deal because he has been desperate to forge a opening to the Iranian regime since the beginning of his presidency, and unenforceable international agreements that damage American interests are his favorite form of laurel. (Winning wars seems to rank a good bit lower.) The White House has made it more and more clear that it believes an agreement with Iran, and the rapprochement presumed to follow, will create an Iran we can deal with and will be a big step toward solving many of the region’s problems, such as the rise of ISIS. This idea is, of course, fantastical. The enemy of our enemy and all, but legitimizing and strengthening a totalitarian, terrorist regime that happens to appear to be loosely on the same side of one battle (in Iraq, Iranian-backed Shia militias aren’t really the answer to Sunni radicals) isn’t much of a long-term strategy. The Islamic Republic of Iran’s founding doctrine renders the United States its mortal enemy. This regime is never going to be a partner, and this deal is premised not just on the idea that we think they could be, but that we should give them just about every concession possible to make it happen. Obama’s plan is not necessarily a fait accompli. There are months until the final deal will be hammered out, and sanctions relief may not start for some time. The president suggested today that he will consult Congress about the deal, though it is almost inconceivable that he will voluntarily submit it for approval. It falls to Congress, then, to pass new legislation to set requirements for a final agreement with Iran and empower itself to vote a deal down, although it will take a veto-proof majority to get such a measure into law. The situation demands serious resistance from Congress, in any case, and from our sometimes-wiser allies, France chief among them. Yet it is also quite possible that this charade will proceed, and that Obama, elevating strategic naïveté to an art form, has committed one of the great diplomatic blunders of our time. An emboldened Iran will be a very dangerous thing for the Middle East and Israel; the nuclear-arms race that this deal could spark would be even worse. We hope the president and our allies will come to recognize the folly of the tentative deal before it is formally complete. If not, Congress must do everything it can to scuttle it, and show the world — and our allies — that U.S. policy has some adult supervision.

This editorial from National Review is exactly right in its assessment.

Iran Brags About Nuke Concessions

Iran and world powers on Thursday announced that following the latest round of nuclear negotiations, Western powers agreed to permit Iran to continue operating the core aspects of its nuclear program and that all sanctions of the Islamic Republic would be terminated. After failing to meet a March 31 deadline for the announcement of a firm political agreement, Secretary of State John Kerry and Javad Zarif, his Iranian counterpart, said that the sides had agreed in principle to let Iran continue running major portions of its nuclear program. Despite threats from Obama administration officials that the United States would abandon talks if Iran continued to demand greater concessions, Kerry extended his trip and conducted a series of meetings aimed at hashing out a statement of progress—a far cry from the detailed document officials vowed would be finalized by now. The sides continue to disagree over Iranian demands that it be permitted to continue key nuclear research and granted the ability to ramp its program up to industrial capacity after a decade. However, Zarif said many of these issues are closer to being resolved. “None of those measures” that will move to scale back Iran’s program “include closing any of our facilities,” Zarif said. “We will continue enriching; we will continue research and development.” “Our heavy water reactor will be modernized and we will continue the Fordow facility,” Zarif said. “We will have centrifuges installed in Fordow, but not enriching.” The move to allow Iran to keep centrifuges at Fordow, a controversial onetime military site, has elicited concern that Tehran could ramp up its nuclear work with ease. Zarif said that once a final agreement is made, “all U.S. nuclear related secondary sanctions will be terminated,” he said. “This, I think, would be a major step forward.” Zarif also revealed that Iran will be allowed to sell “enriched uranium” in the international market place and will be “hopefully making some money” from it. European Union High Representative Federica Mogherini said in a statement that the sides had “taken a decisive step” in paving over disagreements on key fronts and would now work “for a final deal” by June. In return, the United States and international partners will work to “terminate” all of the “nuclear-related sanctions” currently being imposed on Iran. The United Nations also will move to endorse the ongoing Joint Plan of Action interim deal and terminate all of its previous security council resolutions on Iran. The Fordow nuclear facility will eventually be “converted from an enrichment site to a nuclear psychics and tech center,” Mongherini said. No fissile material such as uranium will be permitted at the former military site. However, this could allow Iran to continue running thousands of nuclear centrifuges that could be used to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels.

This is unbelievably stupid…  John Kerry and Obama are the new Neville Chamberlains of our time..  Awful..

Kerry accused of exaggerating role as senator in early global warming hearings

Secretary of State John Kerry is taking heat for exaggerating his role as a senator in organizing the chamber’s first climate-change hearings. Questions about Kerry’s repeated assertions that he helped organize and participated in the Senate hearings roughly 27 years ago resurfaced after a March 12 speech before the Atlantic Council, in Washington, D.C. “Climate change is an issue that is personal to me, and it has been since the 1980s, when we were organizing the very first climate hearings in the Senate,” Kerry told the audience. “Al Gore, Tim Wirth and a group of us organized the first hearings in the Senate on this, 1988. We heard Jim Hansen sit in front of us and tell us it’s happening now, 1988.” The Washington Post fact-checker concluded that Kerry at least exaggerated about his involvement and — comparing his statements to recent tall tales by anchor Brian Williams — gave him four “Pinocchios.” The paper concluded he likely didn’t attend the June 23, 1988, hearing and perpetuated often-told details about the event that proved to be false. According to the Post, the March 12 speech was hardly the first time the tale was told. The Post reported that Kerry in a 2007 Council of Foreign Relations speech, at a 2009 Senate hearing, in a 2010 Huffington Post story and in a 2014 Boston Globe profile said he and Gore, then a Tennessee senator and a fellow Democrat, were part of the first hearing or hearings. “In all of the statements, there is a common theme — Kerry and Gore, riding shotgun together, organizing the ‘very first’ Senate or Capitol Hill hearings on climate change,” the newspaper wrote.

What? Al Gore and John Kerry exaggerating? Nahhhhh!!! lol It blows my mind that there are actually people out there that listen to either one of those two narcassistic blow-hards.