Susan Rice’s Enrichment Program

WashingtonFreeBeacon

Rice has the highest net worth of executive branch members, with a fortune estimated between $24 to $44 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. A Free Beacon analysis of Rice’s portfolio shows thousands of dollars invested in at least three separate companies cited by lawmakers on Capitol Hill for doing business in Iran’s oil and gas sector.

The revelation of these investments could pose a problem for Rice if she is tapped by President Barack Obama to replace Clinton. Among the responsibilities of the next secretary of state will be a showdown with Iran over its nuclear enrichment program.

“That Susan Rice invested in companies doing business in Iran shows either the Obama administration’s lack of seriousness regarding Iran or Rice’s own immorality,” said Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser on Iran and Iraq. “Either way, her actions undercut her ability to demand our allies unity on Iran.”

Benjamin Netanyahu talks of a battle ‘between the modern and the medieval.’ He is right, and the free world must stand with Israel

Telegraph

These forces clash around the globe, but nowhere more starkly than in the Middle East. Israel stands proudly with the forces of modernity. We protect the rights of all our citizens: men and women, Jews and Arabs, Muslims and Christians – Israel wants to see a Middle East of progress and peace. We want to see the three great religions that sprang forth from our region – Judaism, Christianity and Islam – coexist in peace and in mutual respect.

Yet the medieval forces of radical Islam, whom you just saw storming the American embassies throughout the Middle East, they oppose this. They seek supremacy over all Muslims. They are bent on world conquest. They want to destroy Israel, Europe, America. They want to extinguish freedom. They want to end the modern world.

This is not just Israel’s war, it is ours too. The threat Israel faces from the Jihadists is the same threat the West faces on the streets of London, Paris, Washington or Berlin. Al Qaeda, which has had significant ties in the past to Hamas, will be closely watching the outcome of Israel’s military campaign. An emphatic defeat for Hamas will be a huge blow not only to the Islamist dictatorship in Tehran, but to the followers of Bin Laden as well.

10 Dates to Remember from Barack Obama’s Amazing First Term

My question is, where is his Nobel Peace Prize listed? Oh wait…he didn’t earn that…

TownHall

“The issue here is not gonna be a list of accomplishments. As you said yourself, Steve, you know, I would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln.” — Barack Obama

As future generations of Americans look back at the Obama years, perhaps as they search for some sort of explanation for why so many of them are living in huts and paying a 70% income tax rate when the country used to be so rich, they’ll be looking for some key dates and facts. So, in an effort to help future generations, here is a straightforward, entirely factual account of some of the most important moments of the Obama years.

1) Barack Obama Inaugurated (January 20, 2009): Oh, it was such a hopeful, glorious, unified moment. Cats and dogs, Fox and MSNBC, Republicans and Democrats — we were all in it together and rooting Obama on towards victory……….which brings up some obvious questions like: How did Barack Obama squander so much goodwill and what did he do to make so many Americans hate him?

2) Barack Obama throws out the first pitch at the All-Star game (July 14, 2009): On this date, the hippest man ever to occupy the White House revolutionized fashion in America at Major League Baseball’s All-Star game. Ever heard of mom jeans? Well, Barack Obama wore them to the All-Star game and that, combined with his girlish throwing motion, caused moms across America to copy the mom-in-chief – and that is how Barack Obama created mom jeans!

3) Obamacare passes (March 21, 2010): In one fell swoop, Barack Obama managed to cripple American healthcare, put the medical insurance industry on suicide watch, stall the economy, and empower the IRS and unelected death panels to get involved in your health care. If you were looking for comparable bad decisions from other world leaders, you’d probably need to go back to Napoleon’s decision to invade Russia during the winter or Nero’s decision to play the lyre on his balcony while Rome was burning instead of organizing a fire brigade. (In all fairness to Nero, that may be a rumor. For any future generations that are wondering what went so wrong with healthcare, contrary to what your liberal schoolteachers are telling you, George W. Bush was not responsible for “Obamacare.” It really was Obama.)

4) Osama Bin Laden was killed (May 2, 2011): In what undoubtedly was Barack Obama’s greatest moment, a bunch of scared, wimpy SEALs came to him and said, “We’ve figured out where Osama Bin Laden is, but we think we shouldn’t go get him because we’re afraid!” That was undoubtedly how most other Americans would have felt as well because as Obama’s team has told us constantly, he made a “gutsy call” to kill Osama. So obviously, those SEAL pansies had to be pushed into killing him, a wimp like John McCain wouldn’t have done it, and hundreds of millions of Americans who were angry about 9/11 wouldn’t have had cojones as big as President Mom-Jeans since he made such an incredibly “gutsy call.”

5) NASA had its last manned space flight (July 21, 2011): America’s “science President” moved America “forward” by cancelling our manned space program, which actually takes us all the way “backward” to 1960, the year before this country had its first crewed spaceflight. Hooray! We’ve gone backwards fifty years under Obama which takes us “forward”…or something.

6) America loses its AAA credit rating (August 5, 2011): For the first time since 1917, America had its credit rating downgraded from AAA by Standard & Poor’s. Despite Barack Obama’s call telling S&P that Tea Partiers must have spent all those trillions of dollars while he was out of the White House golfing and his promise that “We’ll pay it all back when our next paycheck comes in, we swear”, S&P refused to take Obama’s record-breaking deficit numbers off the books.

7) Barack Obama increases the national debt more in 3 years and 2 months than George Bush did in two terms (March 18, 2012): Despite delivering the “feeblest economic recovery since the Great Depression,” Barack Obama managed to rack up more debt in 38 months than George W. Bush did in 96 months. That’s sort of like putting down enough money to buy a Lamborghini and getting a used Dukes of Hazzard remote control toy car in return.

8) “You didn’t build that.” (July 13, 2012): In a revolutionary speech — well, for the President of a capitalistic country anyway — Barack Obama explained how the markets work. Apparently, the government provides roads, street signs, and regulations and in response, small businesses spring up to provide jobs and tax revenue without any individual effort, sort of like mushrooms after a night of hard rain.

9) Barack Obama had a Las Vegas Fundraiser (September 12, 2012): One day after Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans died because the Obama Administration ignored numerous warnings that they were in danger, Barack Obama jetted off to a fundraiser in Las Vegas. There were fears that four Americans dying because of Obama’s incompetence might spoil the mood, but all reports seem to indicate that a good time was had by all.

10) Barack Obama gets demolished in his first head-to-head debate with Mitt Romney (October 3, 2012): Surprisingly, Barack Obama, whom the mainstream media has christened as the most warm, charismatic, cool, confident, competent and good looking President in American history, was soundly defeated (as in Genghis Khan’s forces managed to soundly defeat the unarmed farmers who opposed him) by Mitt Romney, who is often fondly described as “robotic, but in a good way” by his supporters. The explanations for this inexplicable defeat ranged from “The air in Denver was too thin for him,” to “Jim Lehrer didn’t ask Obama enough questions about how wonderful he is,” to “Do you think he’s high again? I mean, I wouldn’t put it past him – and, wow, would it explain a LOT OF THINGS about his presidency.”

Ahmadinejad: World forces must annihilate Israel

JPost

In a speech published on his website Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said the ultimate goal of world forces must be the annihilation of Israel.

Speaking to ambassadors from Islamic countries ahead of ‘Qods Day’ (‘Jerusalem Day’), an annual Iranian anti-Zionist event established in 1979 by Ayatollah Khomeini and which falls this year on August 17, Ahmadinejad said that a “horrible Zionist current” had been managing world affairs for “about 400 years.”

It was Zionists, he said, who were “behind the scene of the world’s main powers, media, monetary and banking centers.”

“They are the decision makers, to the extent that the presidential election hopefuls [of the USA] must go and kiss the feet of the Zionists to ensure their election victory,” he added.

Ahmadinejad added that “liberating Palestine” would solve all the world’s problems, although he did not elaborate on exactly how that might work.

“Qods Day is not merely a strategic solution for the Palestinian problem, as it is to be viewed as a key for solving the world problems,” he said.

He added: “Anyone who loves freedom and justice must strive for the annihilation of the Zionist regime in order to pave the way for world justice and freedom.”

The Iranian president said that Israel reinforced “the dominance of arrogant powers in the region and across the globe” and that Arab countries in particular – he cited Bahrain, Yemen, Libya, Syria and Turkey – were affected by Israel’s “plots.”

Ahmadinejad, who has called the Holocaust a myth, has previously called for Israel’s annihilation, in a 2005 speech in which he used a Persian phrase that translates literally as “wiped off the page of time.”

Obama’s second-term agenda will prove devastating to U.S.

AaronKlein

Americans may think they know what President Obama would do if he wins four more years. But, in reality, they have no idea just how radical and far-reaching his agenda would be.

Obama himself has been clear about using another term to “reform” our financial sector and ensure the implementation of ObamaCare. The president also has said he would attempt progressive-style immigration reform, with the presumption of amnesty for illegal aliens.

Many figure Obama would continue his relentless expansion of federal government power; increasing even further his crushing, multitrillion-dollar intergenerational debt; and pursue a weak foreign policy coupled with the evisceration of America’s military.

These generalized ambitions, however, do not scratch the surface of the specific, transformative assault that is planned upon our country.

Months of painstaking research into thousands of documents have enabled Brenda J. Elliott and me to expose the detailed template for Obama’s next four years — the one actually created by Obama’s own top advisers, strategists and associated progressive groups.

This second-term blueprint is laid bare in our upcoming book, “Fool Me Twice: Obama’s Shocking Plans for the Next Four Years Exposed.”

We found that, just as in 2008, when Obama concealed his true presidential plans behind bland rhetoric of ending partisan differences and cutting the federal deficit, his 2012 re-election theme of creating jobs conceals far more than it reveals about his true agenda for a second term.

 

Here are some of the second-term plans we uncovered:

• The re-creation of a 21st-century version of FDR’s Works Progress Administration program within the Department of Labor that would oversee a massive new bureaucracy and millions of new federal jobs;

• An additional government-funded jobs program that provides “good jobs” capable of supporting a family with a “decent standard of living.”

• A new government mandate to force businesses to provide twelve weeks of paid benefits to employees who need time off to care for a new child, a sick family member, or their own illness. Plus, a higher, required minimum wage that would raise the floor for all employees.

•       An expansive, de facto amnesty program for illegal aliens via both executive order and interagency directives linked with a reduction in the capabilities of the U.S. Border Patrol.

•     Plans to bring in untold numbers of new immigrants with the removal of caps on H-1B visas and green cards.

•     Government-funded, neighborhood-based programs to better integrate the newly amnestied immigrants into society, including education centers and health care centers. A “federal solution” to ensure that the amnestied immigrants are treated “equitably” across the United States.

•     A National Infrastructure Bank that would evaluate and finance infrastructure projects of substantial regional and national importance” and would finance “transportation infrastructure, housing, energy, telecommunications, drinking water, wastewater, and other infrastructures.”

•     The wresting of control of the military budget from Congress by placing an ”independent panel” in charge of military spending while slashing  the defense budget in shocking ways.

•      Spreading the vastly reduced resources of the U.S. Armed Forces even thinner by using them to combat “global warming,” fight global  poverty, remedy “injustice,” bolster the United Nations and step up use of  “peacekeeping” deployments;

•     A new “green” stimulus program and the founding of a federal “green” bank or “Energy Independence Trust,” which would borrow from the federal treasury to provide low-cost financing to private-sector investments in “clean energy. “

•  A “green Manufacturing” revolving loan fund to create 680,000 manufacturing jobs and 1,972,000 additional jobs over five years

•     Detailed plans to enact single-payer health care legislation controlled by the federal government.

 

How did we obtain this expansive blueprint? By investigating the policy papers and legislative proposals of the same progressive shadow groups that crafted Obama’s first term.

Obama’s first-term strategy did not materialize out of thin air. The president’s signature policies, including the “stimulus,” defense initiatives and even ObamaCare, were crafted over years by key progressive think tanks and activists, usually first promoted in extensive research and policy papers. Some first-term plans were even recycled and modified from older legislative attempts that had previously been pushed by progressive Democrats.

Many of these same progressive groups and activists have been hard at work planning Obama’s second-term strategy: jobs, wages, health care, immigration, defense, even electoral reform.

One joke going around the capital after the rare Washington earthquake of August 2011 was that Obama had proclaimed it: “Bush’s fault.” Yet it was Bush who must be credited with dusting off an old American saw that well applies to his White House successor: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

Will we, the American people, allow ourselves to be fooled again?

Mr. Netanyahu’s Dilemma

RogerLSimon

Who would want to be Benjamin Netanyahu? As the prime minister of Israel he has a dreadful calculus to make: Is Barack Obama sufficiently serious about preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons?

The latest development would seem to be reassuring. According to the Financial Times:

The Obama administration said that seven more economies would be exempt from its Iran-related sanctions that come into force at the end of the month, but left open the prospect that China could still face sanctions.

The state department announced Monday that Turkey, India, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, South Africa and Sri Lanka had all reduced purchases of Iranian oil by a large enough amount to be given a six-month exemption from the sanctions, which come into operation on June 28.

In an earlier announcement, Japan and 10 European countries had already been awarded an exemption.

A balancing act is evidently in progress here, with the U.S. encouraging various powers (India and South Korea are Iran’s second- and fourth-largest oil buyers, according to Reuters) to reduce their oil purchases from the mullahs a significant amount, but not too much. Too much could have a negative impact on the precarious global economy and possibly even Obama’s reelection chances.

But the chosen six-month exemption time frame gives these discussions a window wide enough to get past our elections, a fact undoubtedly not lost on Netanyahu and the Iranians.

Equally undoubtedly, both parties made note of President Obama’s overheard remarks to Russian Prime Minister Medvedev, urging him to be patient and implying that after the election things would be different. He, Obama, would have more freedom of action.

So delay, delay, delay. This is good news for the Iranians. Patience is the name of the game for them. They love to wait things out. Indeed, they are masters of it, talking, not talking, walking and talking, talking and not walking, walking and not talking, all the while taking the opportunity to advance their nuclear ambitions.

Those in the administration who are more serious about the Iranian threat probably tell themselves that this time the sanctions (although limited in the manner described above) will really hurt the Iranian regime, that the scalawags genuinely fear the financial repercussions. This time they will work.

It’s hard to believe that sitting here in Los Angeles, even less likely sitting in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

The mullahs’ heady brew of religion and power madness almost certainly makes them immune to these forms of economic pressure, the more so since they mainly affect the already-battered Iranian public.

If the mullahs cared about their people, things would have been different a long time ago. And, unfortunately, that Iranian public seems less to be relied upon, the Green Revolution fading into a sad and, increasingly distant, memory. (I may be wrong about this, but watching the horrifying results of the demonstrations in Egypt and Syria cannot be encouraging to the remaining Greens and their sympathizers.)

So where does this leave Mr. Netanyahu? Not in place to be envied, despite his electoral popularity.

He is staring at an American election that must give him fits. Were Barack Obama – the man who said those “flattering” things about him to ex-French President Sarkozy – to be reelected in November, the Israeli PM’s hands might be tied in a myriad of ways with a myriad of threats.

His window to act is now. One can only wish him luck. (And maybe some high-tech wizardry we have never seen before.)

Oooookay…

Allah Will ‘Bring Down’ America’s Skyscrapers: Horrific New Farrakhan Audio Praising Sharia Law and Threatening ‘Death’ Unless ‘America Submits’

The Minister Louis Farrakhan isn’t one to avoid controversial language. In his Sunday address in San Diego, the Nation of Islam leader slammed Israel, lamented Mexico’s loss of land at the hands of American “trickery” and derided President Barack Obama for his endorsement of same-sex marriage. But that’s only a portion of what was uttered in his nearly three-hour address. During the last 10 minutes, the fiery Farrakhan erupted with fervency, applauding the violence of sharia law and giving some cryptic warnings to America regarding Iranian intervention.

n speaking to his “Arab brothers,” Farrakhan said that they should not kill their children who shame them. But rather than merely lambasting those who participate in honor crimes, he turned the discussion into a referendum on America (in all fairness, while making these comments, he did say that “Islam needs reform,“ and that his Arab brothers need ”mercy from God“ so they can get ”strong enough to live sharia” — but both statements came without proper explanation).

“To my Arab brothers, you should not kill your children in this honor killing after you bring yourself and them into a country that is a modern Babylon and they get sucked up into the culture of decadence,” he said. “They you’re angry with them because they brought shame on the family. Let me tell you, shame on you for looking to America for your health and bringing your children into this and not creating a world for them to revolve in that will keep the decency that you taught them in the old country.”

From here, the conversation turned into a rant about what goes on in the Islamic holy city of Mecca. Farrakhan explained that, following Jumu’ah prayer on Fridays, if someone is guilty of stealing something, locals don’t wait for that individual to go to jail where he or she will be fed and cared for. Instead, he says the offender has his or her hand cut off in the middle of the prayer square and in front of everyone.

If the man or woman steals again, the other hand is lopped off, he said. This would essentially serve as an example of the punishment that one would encounter if entering into crime. Farrakhan then moved on to another story in which he discussed a Filipino man who apparently raped a Muslim woman in Saudi Arabia. This man, too, faced a harsh retribution for his alleged actions. Here’s his commentary on the matter:

“Oh they couldn’t wait. I mean after they find you guilty ain‘t nobody that’s law-abiding feeding a guilty person. I don’t know what the hell is wrong with you people. The taxpayers gotta come out of their pocket to feed murderers, thieves, cutthroats. ‘Ah Farrakhan now that is kind of harsh.’ Yeah, but what you do to people — if you’re innocent that is harsh — but if you’re guilty, brother — see, you expect mercy, but you don’t show it to those whom you rob and kill and rape — see. So, in our world, that man that raped that sister, his head came off. Oh it was quick too. They called it poke chop, that’s right…and when that head goes off, it rolls down the street, you know…”

Farrakhan went on to claim that stealing, fornicating and committing adultery “blinds the eyes, deafens the ears and dumbs the tongue.” Committing such actions, he contends, is as if one’s “head is gone,” as this is indicative of destroying the family — an action that is “worthy of death.”

Then, Farrakhan’s tough message for America was weaved into his closing, as the faith leader warned of potential calamity if the United States decides to take military action against Iran. This danger, he contends, would be thrust upon America by Allah.

“So, America I close. I tell you, you’re on your way to war and if you declare war on Iran at the behest of Israel and you bomb Iran and some of you are saying we should invoke Hiroshima again on Iran, meaning drop an atomic bomb on Muslims — I have even heard that they’re talking about even bombing Mecca…,” he continued.

Of course, there was no mention of where Farrakhan heard that Mecca, a city in Saudi Arabia, was on the U.S.’s list of bomb targets, but that didn’t stop him from making the allegation. He progressed, going on to explain how important it is that someone warn Mecca of the potential danger and that “somebody gotta do what God needs done.” Then, Farrakhan went on to say that he’s willing to give his life, if needed, to properly warn of the danger that will befall the world if America attacks Iran. His words for the U.S. were cryptic.

“So I’m warning you, America, if you bomb Iran, I’m looking at San Diego, I’m looking at your beautiful cities — the God that I represent is going to take out some of your cities with earthquakes,” he proclaimed. “You live in the city, I live in the city, but some of us are going to die, because we agree with them, agree with evil. So the God of judgement and justice, he’s going to kill a lot.”

And he wasn’t done there. Farrakhan continued:

“I’m sorry to have to tell you, but I’m saying this to our president and the warmongers [at another point in the speech 'warmongers' was used to describe Israel]. We can‘t stop you from bombing Iran if that’s what you want to do, but as you take out somebody else’s cities — as you destroy the lives of innocent people like you did in Baghdad on the basis of a lie — then what are you doing for the American people? You’re sentencing them in the weight of justice to the same death you have dealt to other people in other nations.

I am warning you: Take it or let it alone. He will take down cities and when I look at the skyscrapers in some of these major metropolis. He’s not going to take the big ones down first. He’s going to show you his power. In the meantime, one calamity after another until you submit, America, and know that judgement is here. You can escape it but you gotta do right by this people. And if you don’t do right by them, you can’t do right by the people outside of America, if you won’t do right for those who have…built your country.”

This, of course, was the conclusion to his conflagrant speech, as he showcased his distaste for America and the impending wrath he believes the nation is going to potentially face. While it’s not surprising to hear extreme rhetoric coming from Farrakhan, there are certainly some troubling — and new — tidbits embedded here.

012 Commander of USS Cole: Obama’s bin Laden ad was ‘disgusting’

DailyCaller

Retired Commander of the USS Cole, Kirk Lippold is unhappy with President Obama’s decision to politicize the killing of Osama bin Laden. “This whole thing of even putting out that ad, to me is just disgusting because you are politicizing a national security decision,” Lippold said during an interview with The Daily Caller on the one-year anniversary of bin Laden’s killing.

“Any president that was put in that position would have probably made the difficult choice,” he said. “I don’t care what political stripe they are, they would have done it.”

Lippold, who commanded the USS Cole when it was attacked by al-Qaeda during a 2000 refueling stop in the Gulf of Aden, has substantive reasons for opposing the Obama ad: “I lived with the consequences of the disconnected national security policy between two administrations,” he said, “and I do not like to see national security decisions or events politicized to try to score political points during a presidential election year.”

Lippold credited President Obama with making the right call, but also added that “spiking the football like we are seeing done right now, I think is inappropriate.”

Obama Unplugged

WashingtonFreeBeacon

President Obama told outgoing Russian President Dmitri Medvedev he would have “more flexibility” after the 2012 election to deal with issues including missile defense, in an exchange picked up by microphones in Seoul Monday.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.

PRESIDENT MEDVEDEV: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…

OBAMA: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

MEDVEDEV: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

As of 9:40 a.m., video of the exchange has only aired twice on television.

UPDATE: A senior GOP adviser on Capitol Hill called Obama’s remarks distressing.

“If there was any doubt how dangerous Barack Obama would be for America’s security in a second term, the president put all uncertainty to rest today,” said the source, who closely tracks foreign policy matters. “The president just told us that he is itching to hand over America’s most secret missile defense data to a country that is arming Syria and fueling Iran’s Bushehr reactor—and he would do it today but for his re-election concerns. With no political constraints in a second term, who knows what Obama will do.”

The adviser also said Obama’s remarks should cause concern among pro-Israel forces in America.

“If this is what the president’s promising the Russians on missile defense, God only knows what he’s promising Arab leaders about Israel,” noted the souce. “If you think Barack Obama was bad for Israel in term one, put your seatbelt on and get ready for term two.”

Turner to Obama: What Flexibility?

FreeBeacon

A senior House Republican on Monday accused President Obama of going back on promises he would not weaken U.S. missile defenses through negotiations with Russia after the president was overheard promising more concessions after his reelection.

Rep. Michael R. Turner (R., Ohio), chairman of the House Armed Services subcommittee on strategic forces, sought an explanation for the overheard comments made by the president Monday in a discussion in Seoul with Russian President Dmitri Medvedev.

Obama told the outgoing Russian president that “this is my last election and after my election I’ll have more flexibility” regarding contentious missile defense talks with Moscow that have been underway for the past three years.

“Congress has made exquisitely clear to your administration and to other nations that it will block all attempts to weaken U.S. missile defense,” Turner stated in the letter. “As the chairman of the strategic forces subcommittee, which authorizes U.S. missile defense and nuclear weapons policy, I want to make perfectly clear that my colleagues and I will not allow any attempts to trade missile defense of the United States to Russia or any other country.”

Turner noted that during the December 2010 ratification debate over the New START arms treaty with Russia the president made specific promises that Russia’s opposition to U.S. missile defenses would not impact U.S. plans to deploy both short- and medium-range missile defenses in Europe and elsewhere.

Additionally, the president promised to make both “qualitative and quantitative improvements in its missile defenses,” Turner said.

“You have already walked away from detailed promises to modernize the U.S. nuclear deterrent; are you now planning to walk away from your promises regarding U.S. missile defense as well?” Turner asked.

Amid concerns that the administration planned to share highly classified missile defense secrets with Russia in an effort to assuage Moscow’s fears that U.S. defenses will target its missiles, the defense authorization bill signed into law by the president contains a provision that limits the president’s ability to share classified data with Russia.

“Congress took this step because it was clear based on official testimony and administration comments in the press that classified information about U.S. missile defenses, including hit-to-kill technology and velocity at burnout information, may be on the table as negotiating leverage for your reset with Russia,” Turner said, noting that the president said he may treat the limit as nonbinding when he signed the defense bill into law.

The comments in Seoul, in addition to the signing statement, “suggests that you and your administration have plans for U.S. missile defenses that you believe will not stand up to electoral scrutiny,” Turner said.

Turner said Congress has made clear to the administration and to other nations that it will block all efforts by the administration to weaken missile defenses.

The subcommittee chairman added that as the chairman in charge of overseeing missile defenses and nuclear weapons policy, “I want to make perfectly clear that my colleagues and I will not allow any attempts to trade missile defense of the United States to Russia or any other country.”

The revealing comments by Obama followed a 90-minute meeting with Medvedev at the end of the nuclear security summit.

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space,” Obama said, referring to newly elected Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility,” Obama said.

Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl criticized the president for promising concessions on missile defense.

In a statement, Kyl said that the president canceled plans for anti-ballistic missile systems in Poland and Czech Republic and supported langauge in the New START arms treaty that links missile defense to nuclear reductions.

“We know the administration is sharing information with Russia, including plans to deploy missile defenses in Europe,” Kyl said. “We know the president has significantly reduced funding and curtailed development of the U.S. national missile defense system, undermining our ability to effectively intercept long-range ballistic missiles. And we know the president has doubled-down on efforts to reduce our nuclear arsenal while failing to honor his promises to modernize the aging nuclear weapons complex.”

However, Kyl said what is unknown is what Obama has planned for after the election after gaining the reported “flexibility” in dealing with Moscow.

“Perhaps the Russians, in whom President Obama recently confided, could shed some light on his missile defense plans for the American people who otherwise have been left in the dark by this president,” Kyl said.

Deputy national security adviser for strategic communications Ben Rhodes said in a statement issued late Monday that the United States is “committed to implementing our missile defense system, which we’ve repeatedly said is not aimed at Russia.”

“However, given the longstanding difference between the U.S. and Russia on this issue, it will take time and technical work before we can try to reach an agreement,” Rhodes said.

“Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough.”

Rhodes said Obama and Medvedev “agreed that it was best to instruct our technical experts to do the work of better understanding our respective positions, providing space for continued discussions on missile defense cooperation going forward.”

Putin told reporters last month prior to his election as president that lengthy talks with the United States on European missile defense had failed because U.S. negotiators were unwilling to codify oral proposals made in the talks as part of a formal agreement.

“They made some proposals to us which we virtually agreed to and asked them to get them down on paper,” Putin told foreign news editors Feb. 2.

“They made a proposal to us just during the talks, they told us: we would offer you this, this and that. We did not expect this, but I said: we agree. Please put it down on paper. We were waiting for their answer for two months. We did not get it, and then our American partners withdrew their own proposals, saying: no, it’s impossible.”

The proposals included guarantees that U.S. and NATO missile defenses would not be directed at Russia’s missiles.

Additionally, U.S. negotiators, according to Putin, offered the ability to conduct round-the-clock monitoring of anti-missile systems and radar to make sure they were fixed toward Iran and unable to target Russia.

“This would not change the situation dramatically, but we said: okay, it’s already something, we agree. Put it down on paper. But they refused,” Putin said.

The comments contradict the statements of Ellen Tauscher, former undersecretary of state for international security, who denied that she and other U.S. officials had offered concessions to Moscow on missile defenses that would legally constrain U.S. defenses.

Tauscher, who has since stepped down, drafted a missile defense agreement that was to be signed at the May 2011 summit of G-8 leaders in Deauville, France. However, White House lawyers pulled the draft agreement before it could be signed over concerns it would be interpreted by Moscow as containing provisions on U.S. systems that would be legally binding.

The Obama administration in 2009 rejected a plan by the George W. Bush administration to deploy long-range interceptor missiles in Eastern Europe that would be used to protect the United States from missile attacks from Iran.

Instead, the administration has developed what it calls a Phased Adaptive Approach for Europe that involves less-capable SM-3 missile defense interceptors that will not be capable of protecting the U.S. homeland from missile attack for at least a decade from now.

The concession was designed to coax Russia into an agreement on missile defense. Instead, Russia has responded by threatening to deploy advanced short-range nuclear-capable missiles in western Russia.

A senior Republican aide told the Free Beacon that Obama’s comments were distressing.

“If there was any doubt how dangerous Barack Obama would be for America’s security in a second term, the president put all uncertainty to rest today,” said the source, who closely tracks foreign policy matters. “The president just told us that he is itching to hand over America’s most secret missile defense data to a country that is arming Syria and fueling Iran’s Bushehr reactor—and he would do it today but for his re-election concerns. With no political constraints in a second term, who knows what Obama will do.”

The adviser also said Obama’s remarks should cause concern among pro-Israel forces in America.

“If this is what the president’s promising the Russians on missile defense, God only knows what he’s promising Arab leaders about Israel,” noted the souce. “If you think Barack Obama was bad for Israel in term one, put your seatbelt on and get ready for term two.”