And this is very disconcerting....

"As I noted yesterday, the March deadline for the “political framework” in the P5+1 talks is fish-or-cut-bait time for Democrats who said they would vote on the Menendez-Kirk sanctions bill if there was no such deal covering all the relevant issues. But Iran’s supreme leader complained about an interim deal and now — wouldn’t you know it? — the administration is backpedaling. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki let on that the “deadline” is more like an aspiration. At the daily briefing on Monday, she declared, “Yes. It is a goal, it remains a goal, but — and the secretary has been very vocal about that. We’ve never called it a deadline. We’ve called it a goal of when we want to achieve the political framework.” Actually, that is not true."

The Iran deadline is not a deadline - The Washington Post

"Pskai herself last month said, “On the deadline question, which I know you’ve had in the past, the P5+1, coordinated by the EU and Iran, agreed to extend the nuclear talks until March 31st to reach a political agreement, and then June 30th to reach all of the technical details.” Sounds like they thought it was a deadline until the supreme leader decided he didn’t like the idea of a deadline. The White House spokesman as late as Jan. 28 was saying that “the President has made clear the importance of the end-of-March deadline in our own pursuit of a political framework there.”

deadlines in this administration are similar to their interpretation of a line in the sand!

I do not think they feel whatever they may have said previously has any relevance to what is happening or said today.