Boehner accuses Obama of not having 'the guts' to cut spending

House Speaker John Boehner Tuesday repeatedly challenged the president's willingness to go against his own party on issues that include reforms to social programs and spending.

"I think he'd like to deal with it [fiscal problems], but to do the kind of heavy lifting that needs to be done, I don't think he's got the guts to do it,” the Ohio Republican said in a meeting with a small group of reporters for nearly an hour Tuesday morning. “He understands there is a spending problem. He understands that we need changes and reforms, and we need to solve these problems."

When pressed about the severity of that statement, he modified, saying the president does not have the "courage."Washington is in the midst of yet another fiscal crisis, facing a political showdown over so-called "sequestration," the self-imposed round of across-the-board spending cuts to domestic programs and the Pentagon. The sequester was supported by both the White House and Congress as a way to encourage lawmakers to find common ground. Instead, they have been mired in a stalemate, unable to find an equitable solution for both sides. 

"I am not suggesting that this is easy,” Boehner said, “but what I am suggesting is that he is the President of the United States. This is the biggest threat to our society."

President Obama campaigned on raising taxes on the wealthy and got that in the showdown over the fiscal cliff. He wants more revenue -- from what he says are "loopholes and deductions" for the wealthy. Republicans have balked at that notion, saying he already got all the revenue he was going to get.

The White House has accused Boehner of walking away from "grand bargains," deals to reduce the country's deficits, in both 2011 and 2012 because he could not sell it to his base. Boehner's office vehemently disagrees with that notion, instead pointing the finger back at the president.

Republicans also feel as if they have already given in and do not want to give more, particularly after passing the tax increase and punting on the debt ceiling, voting to suspend it temporarily until the Democratic-controlled Senate passes a budget, something it has not done in years.

But those maneuvers have not been without staunch GOP opposition and misfires. President Obama and Boehner were thought to be, once again, close to a deal when Boehner abruptly announced "Plan B," an initiative pushed by House leadership, including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), that would have let tax cuts expire for millionaires. But Boehner pulled the measure after he realized it did not have majority support within his conference.

Instead, Boehner issued a statement urging President Obama and the Democratic-controlled Senate to pass something to avert the fiscal cliff. Boehner eventually brought the Senate-passed measure to the House floor. It passed without majority GOP support.

On immigration, Boehner claimed in the meeting, "The thing I am most concerned about immigration reform is the president getting in the way. Sometimes I think he'd rather have an issue than a solution. Here's the guy who four years ago said he was going to have immigration reform, and he's done absolutely nothing for four years. I hope the president will play a constructive role."

Democrats say that prior to the 2012 presidential election, they have faced a brick wall of opposition on immigration, despite President Obama's promises, especially from House Republicans. But since Obama's re-election, in which he won 71 percent of the Hispanic vote, Republicans have sounded a different tune on immigration.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), who will give the GOP response and is leading an immigration-reform effort in the Senate, dropped by the meeting as well.

"I didn't mean to interrupt--,” Rubio said, as he looked for a cup of coffee.

When asked if he is feeling any pressure tonight, big smile and said, "No."

Obama to release document on targeted killings to Congress

The Senate Intelligence Committee will receive a classified document Thursday that seeks to justify the administration's policy of targeting Americans overseas via drone attacks, chairwoman Dianne Feinstein said.

"I am pleased that the president has agreed to provide the Intelligence Committee with access to the OLC (Office of Legal Counsel) opinion regarding the use of lethal force in counterterrorism operations," the California Democrat said in a statement Wednesday.

"It is critical for the committee's oversight function to fully understand the legal basis for all intelligence and counterterrorism operations."

The announcement came shortly after an administration official said President Barack Obama had yielded to demands that he turn over to Congress the classified Justice Department legal advice that seeks to justify the policy."Today, as part of the president's ongoing commitment to consult with Congress on national security matters, the president directed the Department of Justice to provide the congressional Intelligence committees access to classified Office of Legal Counsel advice related to the subject of the Department of Justice White Paper," an administration official said Wednesday.

The 16-page white paper -- titled "Lawfulness of a Lethal Operation Directed Against a U.S. Citizen who is a Senior Operational Leader of Al Qaida or an Associated Force" -- is a policy paper rather than an official legal document.

The president, the official said, was turning over the information because he believes the scrutiny and debate is healthy.

The Senate Intelligence Committee is expected to receive the document the same day Obama's pick for CIA director, John Brennan, faces a confirmation hearing.

Brennan's hearing Thursday comes amid complaints from senators, including several Democrats, about secrecy surrounding the drone policy.

Amnesty International also weighed in on the debate, saying Congress should grill Brennan on his claim that the Obama administration's drone strikes are "conducted in full compliance with the law."

Iran says it has footage from downed U.S. drone

"Furthermore, Congress should immediately hold public hearings with independent experts to examine the administration's legal reasoning and ensure that the administration is following the 'rule book' for the use of lethal force that already exists: international human rights law and, in the very narrow circumstances to which it applies, international humanitarian law," the group said.

In a 2012 speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, Brennan asserted that the drone strikes are legal under the Authorization for Use of Military Force resolution passed by Congress after the 9/11 attacks.

In addition, "There is nothing in international law that bans the use of remotely piloted aircraft for this purpose or that prohibits us from using lethal force against our enemies outside of an active battlefield, at least when the country involved consents or is unable or unwilling to take action against the threat," Brennan said at the time.

This does not appear to be the view of Ben Emmerson, United Nations special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, who announced plans in October to investigate U.S. drone attacks and the extent to which they cause civilian casualties.

The drone campaign against al Qaeda and its allies has been one of Brennan's biggest legacies in the four years he was the president's principal adviser on terrorism.

According to a count by the public policy group New America Foundation, at least 28 of al Qaeda's leading members have been killed in drone strikes, including the U.S. citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, who played an operational role in al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Al-Awlaki's teenage son died in a separate strike.

On Wednesday, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee said the attack that killed al-Awlaki was justified.

"This is somebody who had said that he didn't want his U.S. citizenship anymore," Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Michigan, told MSNBC's "Andrea Mitchell Reports."

He said al-Awlaki had officially joined al Qaeda, and al Qaeda had declared war on the United States."

"The legal basis of this goes back many, many years when U.S. citizens would go and fight for foreign nations that were engaging in combat with the United States," Rogers said. "So what they were saying is, once you've made that choice, you no longer get the protections that you would. I mean, if you join the enemy overseas, you join the enemy overseas. And we're going to fight the enemy overseas."

In his speech at the Wilson Center, Brennan said drone strikes are "ethical" because of "the unprecedented ability of remotely piloted aircraft to precisely target a military objective while minimizing collateral damage; one could argue that never before has there been a weapon that allows us to distinguish more effectively between an al Qaeda terrorist and innocent civilians."

And Obama himself defended it in an appearance last October on "The Daily Show."

"There are times where there are bad folks somewhere on the other side of the world, and you've got to make a call and it's not optimal," he said. "And sometimes you've got to make some tough calls. But you can do so in a way that's consistent with international law and with American law."

U.S., allies warn North Korea against 'provocative' moves

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and his South Korean and Japanese counterparts warned North Korea against any "provocative" moves Sunday ahead of a possible new nuclear bomb test by Pyongyang.

In a round of calls Sunday, Kerry, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida and South Korea's Kim Sung-hwan all agreed the North must understand "that it will face significant consequences from the international community if it continues its provocative behavior," according to a summary of the calls from the U.S. State Department.Earlier Sunday, North Korea announced that its leader, Kim Jong Un, "has made an important decision" that would strengthen the country. The brief statement on the state-run news agency KCNA provided no details, but it said the decision was made at a meeting of the reclusive Stalinist state's Party Central Military Committee.

 Pyongyang threatens South Korea Region braces for North Korea nuke test Space race on Korean Peninsula

Across the Demilitarized Zone, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak called on his government to be prepared for a possible test. Lee paid a visit to the underground bunker that serves as the South's crisis management center, his press office reported.North Korea has conducted two previous nuclear tests, in 2006 and 2009, and proclaimed itself a "nuclear state" in 2012. U.S. officials told CNN last week that the North appeared to be ready test another nuclear device "at any time."

U.S. analysts believe the 2006 test had a yield of about 1 kiloton -- comparable to the explosive power of about 1,000 tons of TNT -- while the second was roughly 2 kilotons, National Intelligence Director James Clapper told a Senate committee in 2012.

By comparison, the bomb the United States dropped on Hiroshima in 1945 was roughly 15 kilotons.

The U.N. Security Council voted to tighten sanctions on Pyongyang in January, after the North launched a satellite aboard a long-range rocket in December.

The North Koreans responded by announcing they planned another nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches as part of a new phase of confrontation with the United States.

Storm system threatens to bring high winds, tornadoes to 10 states

A storm system stretching from Texas north to Michigan threatens to bring "widespread damaging winds and several tornadoes" to parts of 10 states, the National Weather Service said Tuesday.

"An increasing threat for severe thunderstorms will occur through tonight in advance of a strong cold front moving across the central United States," the weather service's Storm Prediction Center said. "The most intense thunderstorms are anticipated late this afternoon and especially into the overnight hours tonight across parts of the lower Ohio Valley, mid-South and lower Mississippi Valley."

States threatened by what the agency called a moderate risk of severe weather are Arkansas, southern Illinois, extreme southwestern Indiana, western Kentucky, western Tennessee, southern Missouri, northern Louisiana, northern Mississippi, southeastern Oklahoma and northeastern Texas, the agency said.But severe storms are possible along a line from the southern Great Lakes to the Louisiana coast, the Storm Prediction Center said.

Tornado watches were up Tuesday afternoon for portions of Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma and Texas.

Those storms could be at their most dangerous late Tuesday night into Wednesday morning, CNN meteorologist Sarah Dillingham said.

Extreme weather and a changing climate

Even outside the areas most at risk for tornadoes, wind gusts could reach 80 mph in some areas -- enough to bring down trees and power lines, she said.

On Wednesday, the threat shifts farther east, with parts of Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia at moderate risk of severe weather, including damaging winds and isolated tornadoes, the Storm Prediction Center said.

After the severe weather, a cold-weather system could bring snow and freezing rain to the Midwest, beginning Wednesday, and the threat of extremely cold weather in the northern Plains states and Upper Midwest, particularly on Thursday.

Anonymous hackers target US agency site

Hackers claiming to be from the activist group Anonymous have hacked a US government website in response to the death of Aaron Swartz.

Activists embedded a video statement on the homepage of the United States Sentencing Commission, an agency of the US government.

The statement referred to the death of Mr Swartz, an internet activist who apparently killed himself in January.

"Two weeks ago today, a line was crossed," the statement said.

"Two weeks ago today, Aaron Swartz was killed. Killed because he faced an impossible choice. Killed because he was forced into playing a game he could not win."

Mr Swartz, who was 26, was facing hacking charges and is believed to have taken his own life.

His federal trial was due to be held next month. If found guilty, he could have faced up to 35 years in prison.

Following his death, Mr Swartz's family released a statement blaming "intimidation" and "prosecutorial overreach" from the criminal justice system.

'Operation last resort'

The attack on the website was scheduled to begin at midnight eastern standard time, according to documents that appear to have been posted online by Anonymous activists.

Later on Saturday the website was not functioningThe USSC is responsible for issuing sentencing guidelines for US federal courts.

The hackers, who had labelled the attack "Operation Last Resort", said the site was chosen for symbolic reasons.

"The federal sentencing guidelines... enable prosecutors to cheat citizens of their constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair trial, by a jury of their peers [and] are a clear violation of the 8th amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishments," the video statement said.

The statement also suggested the hackers had sensitive information relating to a number of US judges that may be made public.

There have been numerous attacks by hackers operating under the Anonymous banner in recent months.

On Thursday two British men were jailed after taking part in an attacks on payment services including Paypal, organised by Anonymous.

Government websites of the UK and other countries have also been the subjects of attacks.

Oldest woman in world dies at 115

Koto Okubo

 Woman in town near Tokyo who became world's oldest living female just last month, has died at 115.

Koto Okubo died Saturday at a nursing home in Kawasaki City, according to city official Mitsuhiro Kozuka. He said her relatives declined to release the cause of her death and family details.

Born Dec. 24, 1897, Okubo held her title for less than a month following the death of Dina Manfredini of the United States.

Manfredini died within two weeks after becoming the world's oldest person. Jiroemon Kimura, a 115-year-old man in Japan's ancient capital of Kyoto, inherited that title. He was born on April 19, 1897.

The city official said Okubo had lived with one of her sons at the same nursing home.

Karzai visit a time for tough talk on security, corruption

Vanda Felbab-Brown is a senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution. Her latest book is "Aspiration and Ambivalence: Strategies and Realities of Counterinsurgency and State-Building in Afghanistan."

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is meeting this week with President Obama in Washington amid increasing ambivalence in the United States about what to do about the war in Afghanistan.

Americans are tired of the war. Too much blood and treasure has been spent. The White House is grappling with troop numbers for 2013 and with the nature and scope of any U.S. mission after 2014. With the persisting corruption and poor governance of the Afghan government and Karzai's fear that the United States is preparing to abandon him, the relationship between Kabul and Washington has steadily deteriorated.

As the United States radically reduces its mission in Afghanistan, it will leave behind a stalled and perilous security situation and a likely severe economic downturn. Many Afghans expect a collapse into civil war, and few see their political system as legitimate.

Karzai and Obama face thorny issues such as the stalled negotiations with the Taliban. Recently, Kabul has persuaded Pakistan to release some Taliban prisoners to jump-start the negotiations, relegating the United States to the back seat. Much to the displeasure of the International Security Assistance Force, the Afghan government also plans to release several hundred Taliban-linked prisoners, although any real momentum in the negotiations is yet to take place.

Washington needs to be careful that negotiations are structured in a way that enhances Afghanistan's stability and is not merely a fig leaf for U.S. and NATO troop departure. Countering terrorism will be an important U.S. interest after 2014. The Taliban may have soured on al Qaeda, but fully breaking with the terror group is not in the Taliban's best interest. If negotiations give the insurgents de facto control of parts of the country, the Taliban will at best play it both ways: with the jihadists and with the United States.

Negotiations of a status-of-forces agreement after 2014 will also be on the table between Karzai and Obama. Immunity of U.S. soldiers from Afghan prosecution and control over detainees previously have been major sticking points, and any Afghan release of Taliban-linked prisoners will complicate that discussion.

Karzai has seemed determined to secure commitments from Washington to deliver military enablers until Afghan support forces have built up. The Afghan National Security Forces have improved but cannot function without international enablers -- in areas such as air support, medevac, intelligence and logistical assets and maintenance -- for several years to come. But Washington has signaled that it is contemplating very small troop levels after 2014, as low as 3,000. Their mission would most likely be limited to counterterrorism efforts.

Everyone is hedging their bets in light of the transition uncertainties and the real possibility of a major security meltdown after 2014. Afghan army commanders are leaking intelligence and weapons to insurgents; Afghan families are sending one son to join the army, one to the Taliban and one to the local warlord's militia.

Patronage networks pervade the Afghan forces, and a crucial question is whether they can avoid splintering along ethnic and patronage lines after 2014. If security forces do fall apart, the chances of Taliban control of large portions of the country and a civil war are much greater. Obama can use the summit to announce concrete measures -- such as providing enablers -- to demonstrate U.S. commitment to heading off a security meltdown. The United States and international security forces also need to strongly focus on countering the rifts within the Afghan army.

Assisting the Afghan army after 2014 is important. But even with better security, it is doubtful that Afghanistan can be stable without improvements in its government.

Afghanistan's political system is preoccupied with the 2014 elections. Corruption, serious crime, land theft and other usurpation of resources, nepotism, a lack of rule of law and exclusionary patronage networks afflict governance. Afghans crave accountability and justice and resent the current mafia-like rule. Whether the 2014 elections will usher in better leaders or trigger violent conflict is another huge question mark.

Emphasizing good governance, not sacrificing it to short-term military expediencies by embracing thuggish government officials, is as important as leaving Afghanistan in a measured and unrushed way -- one that doesn't jeopardize the fledgling institutional and security capacity that the country has managed to build up.

Karzai has been deaf and blind to the reality that reducing corruption, improving governance and allowing for a more pluralistic political system are essential for Afghanistan's stability. His visit provides an opportunity to deliver the message again -- and strongly.