Robert Menendez is making things easier for Democrats stuck between showing support for Israel and backing the Obama administration’s negotiations with Iran.
On Monday, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee removed a pro-Israel bill from the committee’s agenda, Foreign Policy‘s John Hudson reports, after a proposed amendment threatened to split Democrats’ allegiances.
The bill, called the U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Act, would strengthen ties between the two countries in a number of arenas, including military, trade, intelligence, and energy. But an amendment from the committee’s top Republican, Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., gave Menendez pause. Corker’s amendment would force President Obama to present any nuclear deal with Iran to Congress within three days of its signature, a situation the White House is trying to avoid. Congress could hold a “vote of disapproval” and conduct hearings on the nuclear deal, but its opinion would carry no legally binding weight.
This is not the first time lawmakers have attempted to attach Iran sanctions to a bill at the last minute. A tougher version of the Corker amendment, which would have required Obama to prove Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal in order to stave off a reapplication of economic sanctions, was bundled with a defense bill in December. It died soon after, thanks to pressure from the White House. In February, Senate Republicans tried unsuccessfully to add Iran sanctions to a bill about veterans’ benefits.
Here, the Corker amendment’s attempt to link the Israel issue with Iranian nuclear negotiations could be seen as a ploy to divide Democrats in the run-up to midterm elections, forcing them to choose between supporting Israel or the administration. On the other hand, some see no daylight between the two issues, arguing that a pro-Israel stance must include support for sanctions on Iran.
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."