This could be a bigger deal that what originally appears on the surface. It’s one of those things that make other things make sense.

For several years people have wondered what would be the specific benefit to foreign entities sending millions of dollars to the Clinton Family Foundation while Hillary was Secretary of State.

Obviously most of the outside interest is directed toward inquiry and concern of a quid-pro-quo relationship between the State Dept and the donor itself.
However, HotAir shares a specific example that might actually make more sense when considering the contributions on a larger context.
The U.S. State Dept is responsible for oversight of sanctions imposed against nation states like Iran and Cuba. If an entity, individual or nation state, wanted to engage in a business deal in direct violation of those sanctions, and do business with Iran or Cuba, a direct donation to the head of the body who would be in charge of the oversight might help your efforts. (more…)

The U.S. State Department is set to officially identify another harbor for John Kerry’s boat storage during the winter. The Frank Marshall Davis Golf and Tennis Resort.

Today POTUS submitted to Congress statutorily required report & certifications indicating Admin’s intent to rescind #Cuba’s SSOT designation

— Obama NSC- Archived (@NSC44) April 14, 2015

The president informed Congress of his intent to remove Cuba from the ‘State Sponsors of Terror’ list, a key step in his push to normalize relations with Havana. Lawmakers have 45 days to review the president’s decision before it can be formally approved.

The body language of delivery is as telling as the construct within the notes of continual reference.

The deal is what we say it is, until it isn’t what it’s not; and then it becomes something the Iranians say it is.

Gotcha.

Americans trapped in Yemen and trying to escape got a great dose of what Obama’s State Department thinks of them, and it’s not much.  It should be remembered that the State Department botched the evacuation of Libya during the 2011 Islamist civil war.

(Via WFB) The State Department is telling U.S. citizens fleeing the fighting in Yemen to contact the government of India or an international NGO dedicated to migrant rights for help, according to the website for the abandoned U.S. embassy in Sanaa and statements by Indian government officials.

The Chinese Navy last week evacuated hundreds of people from the war-torn country. Russia, Canada, and France are also reported to have recently conducted evacuations of their own.

The website of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Yemen posted two messages on Monday laying out options for American citizens looking to flee the country. The first noted that, “The Indian government has offered to assist U.S. citizens who want to depart Yemen for Djibouti. This potentially includes flights out of Sana’a and ships from Aden. U.S. citizens wishing to take advantage of this opportunity should contact First Secretary Raj Kopal at the Indian Embassy in Sana’a at 00967 734 000 657.” (more…)

The construct of the fraud is becoming more obvious. We outlined it on day one. Yesterday the New York Post and NPR, yes even NPR, outlined the ruse also. American Thinker adds:

[…] Admitting that negotiations to reach the general “framework agreement” failed would render meaningless the June 30 deadline for reaching the detailed agreement. Without the “framework agreement” there is nothing to negotiate. How to save the June 30 deadline without having a March 31 deal — and without losing face?

Easy: agree that a framework agreement was agreed on – but do not sign it, and thus simply do not “agree on what they agreed on”!

Hence, “a senior U.S. official, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the talks, says Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif let each other know in advance that their narratives would be different.” (more)

Today Netanyahu is interviewed by CNN and asked, repeatedly, (@07:00) “Do you trust the President”? (more…)

If you are unfamiliar with the fraud that was the UAC Humanitarian Crisis of 2014, what we outline here might not make sense.  However, for those who do understand that prior fraud there are similarities to point toward.

The New York Post outlines “The Deal” with Iran, or more appropriately stated “the outline”; and points out the stark differences between what President Obama and Secretary Kerry are claiming against the claims of Iran.

Both can be reconciled if you accept the historical reality that everything the Obama administration does and says has to first pass through a domestic political prism.

Passing through that prism, the truth and reality separate.   As Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber honestly admitted, ‘the truth becomes what they say it is’.

After looking at the totality of events that flowed since August of 2014 when New York Times author Thomas Friedman interviewed President Obama:

[…]  On Iran, the president said the chance that American efforts to strike a deal on nuclear weapons is “a little less than 50-50,” in part because some Islamic leaders may fear such a pact would loosen their grip on power.

“That may prevent us from getting a deal done,” Mr. Obama said. “It is there to be had. Whether ultimately Iran can seize that opportunity — we will have to wait and see, but it is not for lack of trying on our part.”  (full article link)

From that moment forward the entire construct of “a deal with Iran” took on a shift.  The administration focused on talking about “compliance” efforts, the Iranian’s focused on talking about “the removal of sanctions”, and internally to their own domestic audience, toward “maintaining their program”. (more…)

The Washington Post is not buying the fraud either.  When President Obama loses the Post editorial staff you know something is fundamentally changed.

The Washington Post – THE “KEY parameters” for an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program released Thursday fall well short of the goals originally set by the Obama administration. None of Iran’s nuclear facilities — including the Fordow center buried under a mountain — will be closed.

Not one of the country’s 19,000 centrifuges will be dismantled. Tehran’s existing stockpile of enriched uranium will be “reduced” but not necessarily shipped out of the country. In effect, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will remain intact, though some of it will be mothballed for 10 years. When the accord lapses, the Islamic republic will instantly become a threshold nuclear state.

That’s a long way from the standard set by President Obama in 2012 when he declared that “the deal we’ll accept” with Iran “is that they end their nuclear program” and “abide by the U.N. resolutions that have been in place.” Those resolutions call for Iran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. Instead, under the agreement announced Thursday, enrichment will continue with 5,000 centrifuges for a decade, and all restraints on it will end in 15 years. (more…)

Bloomberg News doesn’t call it that, they call it: “Obama’s Next Move May Be Lifting U.S. Protection of Israel at UN”.

(Bloomberg) — While the world remains fixated on the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, the Obama administration is facing another foreign policy showdown in the United Nations Security Council.

The administration has signaled that it might abandon the decades-long U.S. policy of protecting Israel at the UN and back a Security Council resolution laying out terms for a two-state solution to the almost 67-year-old dispute between the Jewish state and the Palestinians. (more)

However, make no mistake – it is the Power Doctrine. We could burn another thousand words explaining it again, but, well, honestly, few would accept it until it actually comes to pass. And it will come to pass.

President Obama is a fellow traveler and ideological compatriot of Samantha Power. It’s not a matter of “if”, it is entirely a matter of “when”. (more…)

We are beginning to assemble the trail of what has factually taken place within the backstory of the Iranian nuclear negotiations. The dots are all over the place, but essentially the construct looks very familiar.

♦ The White House Team constructed the political “talking points” approximately 2 days ago 3/31/15 (photo above).  [Note subsequent to this meeting not a single media interview by the State Department team]

♦ Those White House points are based on domestic political needs and influenced by increasing domestic backlash.  Goal = Historic, Magnificent, Amazing, etc.

♦ The State Dept. Team in Switzerland (Kerry et al) told to keep quiet as the White House talking points are constructed/finalized. (link) 4/1 and 4/2 absolute silence.

♦ A deal is reached by the Secretary of State team with the Iranian team which does not align with the White House construct (talking points). [The actual deal doesn’t really need to line up with the talking points because that’s not the most important aspect – Think “Tax” VS. “Mandate” in ObamaCare].

♦ The White House talking points are used by President Obama in the Rose Garden.  (link) [Note not a “joint” statement – a pure construct of the White House]

♦ The Iranian team then points out those talking points don’t align in fact with the deal reached by the negotiation teams.  Subsequently calls them “LIES” (link)

Politically the White House now has options: (more…)