Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) confirmed at a press conference late this afternoon that she does not intend to vote for the Iraq deal reached today by the White House and Congress. “I’m not likely to vote for something that doesn’t have a timetable or a goal,” she said, while still praising the deal as “a recognition by the administration that a new direction was called for by the American people.”

Later, House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-WI) insisted that “we intend to continue that fight” for an Iraq timeline “on every vehicle available to us,” adding that the “first two vehicles that we expect to join the issue on are the defense appropriations bill in July and the defense supplemental appropriations bill in September.”

Watch it:

Also during the press conference, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) called the deal “the beginning of the end of the president’s policy in Iraq,” citing the 18 benchmarks and two required ‘progress reports’ laid out in the legislation. Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), the House Majority Whip, pointed out that the bill will allow for passage of the first minimum wage increase in a decade, and for more than $6 billion to be delivered to victims of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.

Crooks and Liars has more.

Digg It!

This evening, ABC’s World News Tonight reported that the “United States has opened a new front in its showdown with Iran.” According to the report, President Bush has directed the CIA to carry out covert operations both inside and outside Iran “aimed directly at weakening the Iranian regime.”

ABC’s investigative correspondent Brian Ross said the CIA’s “non-lethal” program had received “secret presidential approval.” Officials told ABC the CIA plan “takes the place of proposed U.S. military action against Iran, reportedly advocated by Vice President Cheney.” Watch it:

The Blotter has more coverage:

The sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the subject, say President Bush has signed a “nonlethal presidential finding” that puts into motion a CIA plan that reportedly includes a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation and manipulation of Iran’s currency and international financial transactions.

[...]

“Vice President Cheney helped to lead the side favoring a military strike,” said former CIA official Riedel, “but I think they have come to the conclusion that a military strike has more downsides than upsides.”

The covert action plan comes as U.S. officials have confirmed Iran had dramatically increased its ability to produce nuclear weapons material, at a pace that experts said would give them the ability to build a nuclear bomb in two years.

Vali Nasr, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said “I think everybody in the region knows that there is a proxy war already afoot with the United States supporting anti-Iranian elements in the region as well as opposition groups within Iran. And this covert action is now being escalated by the new U.S. directive, and that can very quickly lead to Iranian retaliation and a cycle of escalation can follow.”

Digg It!

“Congressional Democrats relented today on their insistence that a war spending measure sought by President Bush also set a date for withdrawing troops from Iraq. The decision to back down, described by senior lawmakers and aides, was a wrenching reversal for some Democrats, who saw their election triumph as a call to force an end to the war.”

“We don’t have a veto-proof Congress,” said Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader.

Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the House Democratic majority leader, said the new bill was still being assembled, but he acknowledged the political reality facing Democrats. “The president has made it very clear that he is not going to sign timelines,” said Mr. Hoyer. “We can’t pass timelines over his veto.”

UPDATE: The AP notes, “Reid and other Democrats pointed to a provision that would set standards for the Iraqi government in developing a more democratic society. U.S. reconstruction aid would be conditioned on progress toward meeting the goals, but Bush would have authority to order the money to be spent regardless of how the government in Baghdad performed.”

UPDATE II: Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) releases a statement: “I cannot support a bill that contains nothing more than toothless benchmarks and that allows the President to continue what may be the greatest foreign policy blunder in our nation’s history. There has been a lot of tough talk from members of Congress about wanting to end this war, but it looks like the desire for political comfort won out over real action.”

UPDATE III: Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will reportedly oppose the funding bill:

It will split the Democratic caucus in half, with as many as 120 Democrats voting no. Among the nays, I’m told, will be House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who will have negotiated a bill that she thinks is the best option for House Democrats but which she personally can’t support. Most other Democratic leaders are expected to vote in favor. Still, if only 100 Democrats vote yes, the amendment will require at least 118 Republicans in order to pass.

“Some will say no, some will say yes,” the official involved in the negotiations said of rank and file Democrats. “It’s not a perfect bill. Nobody got what they wanted. But it is the beginning of the end of George W. Bush’s policy in Iraq.”

Also, the House leadership is promising “to return to the timelines — and other measures designed to pressure Bush to withdraw from Iraq — in the Defense appropriations bill for the next fiscal year. ‘We’ll be able to write a lot of policy in appropriations that Bush won’t be able to veto,’ says the official.”

Digg It!

Providing further proof that President Bush’s escalation is hardly a short-term surge, Hearst Newspapers reports today that President Bush is quietly implementing a second Iraq troop surge that would “nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year.”

According to the analysis of Pentagon redeployment numbers:

This “second surge” of troops in Iraq, which is being executed by extending tours for brigades already there and by deploying more units, could boost the number of combat troops to as many as 98,000 (from 52,500) by the end of this year. When support troops are included, the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 now to more than 200,000 — the most ever — by the end of the year.

This escalation would bring the total number of brigades in Iraq to 28 by winter. In the current escalation, Bush ordered five brigades to accompany the 15 already stationed in Iraq.

While Bush proudly trumpeted the first escalation in January with a nationally televised address, he is reportedly keeping this one under wraps, not addressing it in any major public medium. “It doesn’t surprise me that they’re not talking about it. I think they would be very happy not to have any more attention paid to this,” said retired Army Maj. Gen. William Nash.

Digg It!

Senate Judiciary Committee heads Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Arlen Specter (R-PA) wrote Attorney General Alberto Gonzales today, demanding he provide answers by June 5 to their “longstanding questions about the Bush Administration’s warrantless wiretapping program.”

The senators told Gonzales that the new request came in light of James Comey’s extraordinary testimony last week, which raised “very serious questions about your personal behavior and commitment to the rule of law.”

This Committee has made no fewer than eight formal requests over the past 18 months — to the White House, the Attorney General, or other Department of Justice officials — seeking documents and information related to this surveillance program. These requests have sought the Executive Branch legal analysis of this program and documents reflecting its authorization by the President. You have rebuffed all requests for documents and your answers to our questions have been wholly inadequate and, at times, misleading.

“To consider any changes to FISA,” Leahy and Specter write, “it is critical that this Committee understand how the Department and the FISA Court have interpreted FISA and the perceived flaws that led the Administration to operate a warrantless surveillance program outside of FISA’s provisions for over five years.”

In other words, Leahy and Specter are telling Gonzales: turn over the information now, or President Bush’s desired changes to FISA are going nowhere.

Digg It!

Read the full letter: Read more