11-14-2024, 11:49 PM
Owag Analysis: Former CIA officer Rolf Mowatt-Larssen on Russia-Ukraine war mdash; Intelligence Matters
INTELLIGENCE MATTERS - IRAN SPECIALINTERVIEW WITH BILL BURNS JIM MILLERCORRESPONDENT: MICHAEL MORELLPRODUCER: OLIVIA GAZIS, JAMIE BENSONMICHAEL MORELL:Bill, Jim, welcome to Intelligence Matters. Bill, this is your second time on the show. Great to have you back.BILL BURNS:It s a pleasure.MICHAEL MORELL:And Jim, this is your maiden voyage on Intelligence Matters. So great to have you and hopefully we ll get you back again.JIM MILLER:Thank you, Michael. Great to be here. Listen to this episode on Stitcher MI stanley cup website CHAEL MORELL:So we re gonna talk about a very important iss stanley cup ue stanley cup here. Where we are with the Iranians at this moment. But I should say that the three of us served together on the Deputies Committee of the National Security Council. We spent a lot of time together in the Situation Room. In fact, we spent a lot of time talking about Iran. We probably spent more time talking about Iran than anything else. So think about this as a mini Deputies meeting LAUGH without Denis McDonough or Tony Blinken.JIM MILLER:Thank you. Those two years were the best ten years of my life. LAUGHTER MICHAEL MORELL:So to kick this off let me remind our listeners kinda where we are at this moment. So the Trump administration has census withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal. It s ramped up sanctions against the Iranians. Those sanctions are strangling the Iranian economy. The Iranians have responded in two ways. One Vamm Democrat Takes Beating For Pro-surge Stance
When Americans debate the elections of change of the 20th century, there are certain dates that immediately come to mind: 1932, 1976, 1980. Maybe even 1992.In each case, the definition is roughly the same. Elections of change are moments of public rebellion. The winning candidates are tapped as torchbearers, opponents of Old Washington and its insider cus stanley mug toms. They offer new direction, a way forward, a break with the past, and the voters offer t stanley cup heir endorsement.But the tendency to associate election-year frustration with actual political change can be misleading and inaccurate, for two simple reasons. Rosy promises, as many Americans know, often vanish at the stump. A stanley fr nd real reform, perversely enough, has a long history of being unplanned and unintended. As an example of the first scenario, there is President Ronald Reagan and the election of 1980. By many appraisals, Reagan was the architect of a smaller, more efficient form of government. In his 1981 inaugural address, he spoke famously of curbing the size and influence of the federal establishment. His re-election all but legitimized the claim. But data suggest otherwise. From 1981 to 1989, according to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the size of the federal civilian payroll grew by 40 percent and 200,000 people.Flip-flop. On the other side is a president like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a man who dramatically expanded the federal government s purview despite having no i
INTELLIGENCE MATTERS - IRAN SPECIALINTERVIEW WITH BILL BURNS JIM MILLERCORRESPONDENT: MICHAEL MORELLPRODUCER: OLIVIA GAZIS, JAMIE BENSONMICHAEL MORELL:Bill, Jim, welcome to Intelligence Matters. Bill, this is your second time on the show. Great to have you back.BILL BURNS:It s a pleasure.MICHAEL MORELL:And Jim, this is your maiden voyage on Intelligence Matters. So great to have you and hopefully we ll get you back again.JIM MILLER:Thank you, Michael. Great to be here. Listen to this episode on Stitcher MI stanley cup website CHAEL MORELL:So we re gonna talk about a very important iss stanley cup ue stanley cup here. Where we are with the Iranians at this moment. But I should say that the three of us served together on the Deputies Committee of the National Security Council. We spent a lot of time together in the Situation Room. In fact, we spent a lot of time talking about Iran. We probably spent more time talking about Iran than anything else. So think about this as a mini Deputies meeting LAUGH without Denis McDonough or Tony Blinken.JIM MILLER:Thank you. Those two years were the best ten years of my life. LAUGHTER MICHAEL MORELL:So to kick this off let me remind our listeners kinda where we are at this moment. So the Trump administration has census withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal. It s ramped up sanctions against the Iranians. Those sanctions are strangling the Iranian economy. The Iranians have responded in two ways. One Vamm Democrat Takes Beating For Pro-surge Stance
When Americans debate the elections of change of the 20th century, there are certain dates that immediately come to mind: 1932, 1976, 1980. Maybe even 1992.In each case, the definition is roughly the same. Elections of change are moments of public rebellion. The winning candidates are tapped as torchbearers, opponents of Old Washington and its insider cus stanley mug toms. They offer new direction, a way forward, a break with the past, and the voters offer t stanley cup heir endorsement.But the tendency to associate election-year frustration with actual political change can be misleading and inaccurate, for two simple reasons. Rosy promises, as many Americans know, often vanish at the stump. A stanley fr nd real reform, perversely enough, has a long history of being unplanned and unintended. As an example of the first scenario, there is President Ronald Reagan and the election of 1980. By many appraisals, Reagan was the architect of a smaller, more efficient form of government. In his 1981 inaugural address, he spoke famously of curbing the size and influence of the federal establishment. His re-election all but legitimized the claim. But data suggest otherwise. From 1981 to 1989, according to the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, the size of the federal civilian payroll grew by 40 percent and 200,000 people.Flip-flop. On the other side is a president like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a man who dramatically expanded the federal government s purview despite having no i