Posted on 10/20/2012 4:48:39 PM PDT by nhwingut
The Obama administration is denying a report that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks that could be a last-chance opportunity to avoid war over Iran's nuclear program.
Citing senior administration officials, The New York Times reported Sunday that Iranian officials have agreed to negotiations, but not until after the presidential election, so that they know whether they're negotiating with President Obama or Mitt Romney.
But National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor pushed back against the Times's story.
"It’s not true that the United States and Iran have agreed to one-on-one talks or any meeting after the American elections," he said in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I guess Valerie couldn’t make up her mind...
Right hand, left hand.....
Ok well that October Surprise didn’t work.
Watch.... keep watching, BHusseinO will try OTHER October Surprises.
The easiest ones for him are Executive Orders...
(whether any one of them is lawful or not, doesn’t matter, it won’t get overturned until long after Re-election day ...)
watch for more phoney attempted October Surprises!
Iran is pulling an age-old scam in order to buy time. Any two bit half wit could see through this like a Madonna costume.
ok, but do they deny Odungo has reduced some sanctions?.
They should wait until their focus group testing is completed before announcing something like this.
I guess in the case, the focus groups figured out it was a stunt.
Anyone ask Ahmadinejad? He’s more likely to give an honest answer than Obama’s people.
“Psssssst...Mahmoud, tell the Grand Ayatollah I’ll have more flexibility after the election.”
Perhaps this is the NY Slimes jumping the gun, thinking that announcing talks would be a plus for Baracchio. In fact, it would probably have the opposite effect and be seen as a desperate stunt.
Even if it wasn't or isn't fiction -- it sets up the question, who would you rathert be negotiating with Iran on this topic? Hillary/Obama? Or Romney and whoever he nominates as Sec. of State?
It's no victory to the current administration, no matter you spin an agreement to sit down after the election.
Nuke Iran.
Then make an agreement.
Axelrod killed it. It would have brought up carter’s stunt before the wisconsin primary in 1980. Watch for iran to comfirm that there was a deal.
NYT leaking a story...
I wonder who dropped the dime on the adminstration
They have to deny the stor y because Iran has not confirmed it which puts the adminstration in a tough spot before the debate
Without Iranian confirmation it looks likes a political stunt
The other possible outcome is that it doesn't work, Romney wins, and they end up negotiating with the guy they tried to knife. You really don't need a PhD in Game Theory to realize that this is, a best, a ploy with more negative outcomes than positive.
From the 0bama administration's point of view, this risks breaking off from our European allies who have, after all, provided a majority of the sanctions that sting, in pursuit of a bilateral push that can only be regarded (and very rightfully so) by the latter as political grandstanding. That does not mean 0bama's team will fail to seek to wring some political benefit out of it as far as it goes. And they've certainly shot themselves in the foot before. But looking like Carter only 17 days before the election may not be recoverable if the media can't spin sitting down at the negotiating table again as a major foreign relations coup. Are they desperate enough to risk that? We'll see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
