NEWSFLASH FOR SNOWFLAKES: Ameria NEVER JOINED The Paris Accords

[Avatar4321]

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

So what?

Sure he should. Doesn't answer my question

 

[Avatar4321]

Acting US ambassador to China quit over Trump climate decision
Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Acting US ambassador to China David Rank resigned from his post in Beijing over President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, several sources familiar with the decision told CNN.

A career foreign service officer since 1990, Rank assumed the position of deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing in January 2016 and had been serving until the arrival of Trump's pick for the job, former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who was confirmed by Congress late last month.

Rank has served in several senior positions within the US State Department including time as the director of the office of Afghanistan affairs and as a senior adviser to the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"Mr. Rank made a personal decision," a senior State Department official told CNN, stopping short of citing the climate deal developments as the reason. "We appreciate his years of dedicated service to the State Department."

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

I honestly believe Trump is retarded. He is beyond dumb.

Trump needs to do his job by naming ambassador nominees, a Democratic Senate aide responds.

Trump Blames Democrats For Blocking Nominees He Hasn't Even Picked Yet

Many would say the same thing about you. Perhaps you would be prudent to be more compassionate and merciful with how you judge others.

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

So you understand my point. Good. I hope you consider it.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

So what?

Sure he should. Doesn't answer my question

Your question is the question a weak sad Bimbo asks in order to deflect...your question is as irrelevant as you ..
Misplaced Blame: Trump Lags In Filling Government Posts

 

[JakeStarkey]

Listen to avatar or people like Huntsman and other men who know what is what.

 

[Avatar4321]

Acting US ambassador to China quit over Trump climate decision
Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Acting US ambassador to China David Rank resigned from his post in Beijing over President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, several sources familiar with the decision told CNN.

A career foreign service officer since 1990, Rank assumed the position of deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing in January 2016 and had been serving until the arrival of Trump's pick for the job, former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who was confirmed by Congress late last month.

Rank has served in several senior positions within the US State Department including time as the director of the office of Afghanistan affairs and as a senior adviser to the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"Mr. Rank made a personal decision," a senior State Department official told CNN, stopping short of citing the climate deal developments as the reason. "We appreciate his years of dedicated service to the State Department."

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

I honestly believe Trump is retarded. He is beyond dumb.

Trump needs to do his job by naming ambassador nominees, a Democratic Senate aide responds.

Trump Blames Democrats For Blocking Nominees He Hasn't Even Picked Yet

Many would say the same thing about you. Perhaps you would be prudent to be more compassionate and merciful with how you judge others.

As Trump is, avatar?

How can we expect.to have a better leader than trump if we aren't better people than he is?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

He need simply to publicly declare the agreement null and void, that it constitutes a treaty not ratified, that Obama's letter of is of no account as it was outside of his constitutional authority to cement such a treaty in the first place.

In other words, there was never an "agreement" except in the mind of Barack Obama.

Oh, Billy, he has already done what he could, and the rest of your post in meaningless.

Five states, more than a hundred cities, scores of Corporations and businesses small and large, and tens of millions of Americans will go right ahead with the accord and ignore Trump and you.

There is nothing you can do except disagree.

So go ahead. Who cares? It's like you're threatening us you will burn 50% of the cash you make next year and we should be upset because we should want to as well. We don't but you and your city and state are free to do so. Just a warning. When you need that money don't come to us looking for a donation.

 

[Avatar4321]

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

So what?

Sure he should. Doesn't answer my question

Your question is the question a weak sad Bimbo asks in order to deflect...your question is as irrelevant as you ..
Misplaced Blame: Trump Lags In Filling Government Posts

How is asking the relevance of your link deflecting?

Deflecting, by definition, is what you are doing by changing the conversation from the point of the original article to ambassador appointments..

Which again, I completely agree trump should be appointing them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Acting US ambassador to China quit over Trump climate decision
Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Acting US ambassador to China David Rank resigned from his post in Beijing over President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, several sources familiar with the decision told CNN.

A career foreign service officer since 1990, Rank assumed the position of deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing in January 2016 and had been serving until the arrival of Trump's pick for the job, former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who was confirmed by Congress late last month.

Rank has served in several senior positions within the US State Department including time as the director of the office of Afghanistan affairs and as a senior adviser to the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"Mr. Rank made a personal decision," a senior State Department official told CNN, stopping short of citing the climate deal developments as the reason. "We appreciate his years of dedicated service to the State Department."

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

I honestly believe Trump is retarded. He is beyond dumb.

Trump needs to do his job by naming ambassador nominees, a Democratic Senate aide responds.

Trump Blames Democrats For Blocking Nominees He Hasn't Even Picked Yet

Many would say the same thing about you. Perhaps you would be prudent to be more compassionate and merciful with how you judge others.

As Trump is, avatar?

How can we expect.to have a better leader than trump if we aren't better people than he is?

That is the point. We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

You speak for yourself well.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

You speak for yourself well.

I identify the Alt Right and Far Right in particular. You are the shame of America. You want to go back to bad ways our ancestors so recently tried to eliminate. But you go back to the bad ways.

 

[Avatar4321]

Acting US ambassador to China quit over Trump climate decision
Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)Acting US ambassador to China David Rank resigned from his post in Beijing over President Donald Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, several sources familiar with the decision told CNN.

A career foreign service officer since 1990, Rank assumed the position of deputy chief of mission at the US embassy in Beijing in January 2016 and had been serving until the arrival of Trump's pick for the job, former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, who was confirmed by Congress late last month.

Rank has served in several senior positions within the US State Department including time as the director of the office of Afghanistan affairs and as a senior adviser to the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"Mr. Rank made a personal decision," a senior State Department official told CNN, stopping short of citing the climate deal developments as the reason. "We appreciate his years of dedicated service to the State Department."

Read more: Acting US ambassador to China resigns - CNNPolitics.com

I honestly believe Trump is retarded. He is beyond dumb.

Trump needs to do his job by naming ambassador nominees, a Democratic Senate aide responds.

Trump Blames Democrats For Blocking Nominees He Hasn't Even Picked Yet

Many would say the same thing about you. Perhaps you would be prudent to be more compassionate and merciful with how you judge others.

As Trump is, avatar?

How can we expect.to have a better leader than trump if we aren't better people than he is?

That is the point. We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

We can change that

 

[Avatar4321]

We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

You speak for yourself well.

I identify the Alt Right and Far Right in particular. You are the shame of America. You want to go back to bad ways our ancestors so recently tried to eliminate. But you go back to the bad ways.

Freedom? Virtue? The constitution? Reason?
When did those become bad?

 

[tyroneweaver]

Wow, you two are soooooooooooo smart. I wish I could be that smart so I could have voted for a liar, business cheat, women assaulting POS like Trump.

I bet you were in charge of bimbo erruption in your voting district

 

[bripat9643]

Snowflakes and Liberals are losing their minds because Obama's Un-Constitutional Global Warming pact in France has been rejected...

President Obama's deal to enter the Paris Accords was just another UN-Constitutional Personal TREATY Obama entered into without ever going through Congress - just like Obama's PERSONAL DEAL with Iran. It was never ratified by Congress, which is what the Constitution calls for.

So the Liberal Extremists, Globalists, and snowflakes are all having breakdowns, becoming 'triggered', and ranting, screaming, crying, and personally attacking President Trump for declaring the United States will not JOIN the Paris Accords, after it never JOINED / AGREED TO ENTER the Paris Accords.


Newsflash: America never joined Paris Agreement - Hot Air

"The fact is the Paris Agreement is a treaty, and the U.S. was never ever a part of it. The United States was the ONLY country that joined by EXECUTIVE ORDER"
...which is is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL!

"Countries seem invariably to have accepted the agreement as a treaty that requires going through their internal treaty-ratification processes, typically submission to the legislature. Countries from the United Kingdom to China to Jamaica have ratified it through their legislatures. So has Brazil, Japan, the Philippines and Australia. In the latter, the question of whether it was a binding international accord requiring submission to Parliament received some discussion, and a parliamentary analysis concluded it was a “major treaty” that needed to be submitted."

"There are people out there saying Paris Agreement is non-binding, the language and State Department guidelines appear to suggest otherwise, and reinforce the idea it’s a treaty."


President Trump did not actually withdraw from anything by what the Fake News Liberal media called 'pulling out'' of the Paris Accord. He simply pointed out that the United States had never joined the Paris Accord, as Obama never had the Constitutional Authority he believed he did not need to enter such a Treaty.
** And this clown considered himself a 'Constitutional Scholar'.

So the 'asshole' in this situation is not the one who accurately pointed out the United States had never joined the Paris Accords - it is the one who violated the Constitution...AGAIN...by entering ANOTHER Un-Constitutional Treaty by Executive Order.

How does the U.S. exit the agreement?

Leaving the Paris Agreement itself is an easy, but lengthy, task.

The deal was specifically designed so that the U.S. could join without the need for congressional approval. On Aug. 29, 2016, President Barack Obama wrote a short letter, which was deposited at the United Nations, signaling that the United States would join the agreement.

A short letter from President Trump will suffice to reverse this action. According to the Paris Agreement, nations that want to withdraw only have to leave a written notice in a U.N. depository.

But Trump won’t be able to write this letter until three years after the Paris Agreement came into force — that is to say, not until Nov. 4, 2019 — thanks to a clause in the deal itself.

It then takes another year before the U.S. can leave the agreement — bringing it to Nov. 4, 2020 — which is also the day after the next presidential election.

With these rules in place, Trump will only see the fulfillment of his campaign promise to leave the Paris agreement either after he’s won a second term as president or been voted out of office.
Top questions and answers now that the U.S. has decided to leave the Paris climate accord

There is no treaty the U.S. can join without Senate approval. Trump doesn't have to do squat other than ignore it.

 

[bripat9643]

Snowflakes and Liberals are losing their minds because Obama's Un-Constitutional Global Warming pact in France has been rejected...

President Obama's deal to enter the Paris Accords was just another UN-Constitutional Personal TREATY Obama entered into without ever going through Congress - just like Obama's PERSONAL DEAL with Iran. It was never ratified by Congress, which is what the Constitution calls for.

So the Liberal Extremists, Globalists, and snowflakes are all having breakdowns, becoming 'triggered', and ranting, screaming, crying, and personally attacking President Trump for declaring the United States will not JOIN the Paris Accords, after it never JOINED / AGREED TO ENTER the Paris Accords.


Newsflash: America never joined Paris Agreement - Hot Air

"The fact is the Paris Agreement is a treaty, and the U.S. was never ever a part of it. The United States was the ONLY country that joined by EXECUTIVE ORDER"
...which is is UN-CONSTITUTIONAL!

"Countries seem invariably to have accepted the agreement as a treaty that requires going through their internal treaty-ratification processes, typically submission to the legislature. Countries from the United Kingdom to China to Jamaica have ratified it through their legislatures. So has Brazil, Japan, the Philippines and Australia. In the latter, the question of whether it was a binding international accord requiring submission to Parliament received some discussion, and a parliamentary analysis concluded it was a “major treaty” that needed to be submitted."

"There are people out there saying Paris Agreement is non-binding, the language and State Department guidelines appear to suggest otherwise, and reinforce the idea it’s a treaty."


President Trump did not actually withdraw from anything by what the Fake News Liberal media called 'pulling out'' of the Paris Accord. He simply pointed out that the United States had never joined the Paris Accord, as Obama never had the Constitutional Authority he believed he did not need to enter such a Treaty.
** And this clown considered himself a 'Constitutional Scholar'.

So the 'asshole' in this situation is not the one who accurately pointed out the United States had never joined the Paris Accords - it is the one who violated the Constitution...AGAIN...by entering ANOTHER Un-Constitutional Treaty by Executive Order.

How does the U.S. exit the agreement?

Leaving the Paris Agreement itself is an easy, but lengthy, task.

The deal was specifically designed so that the U.S. could join without the need for congressional approval. On Aug. 29, 2016, President Barack Obama wrote a short letter, which was deposited at the United Nations, signaling that the United States would join the agreement.

A short letter from President Trump will suffice to reverse this action. According to the Paris Agreement, nations that want to withdraw only have to leave a written notice in a U.N. depository.

But Trump won’t be able to write this letter until three years after the Paris Agreement came into force — that is to say, not until Nov. 4, 2019 — thanks to a clause in the deal itself.

It then takes another year before the U.S. can leave the agreement — bringing it to Nov. 4, 2020 — which is also the day after the next presidential election.

With these rules in place, Trump will only see the fulfillment of his campaign promise to leave the Paris agreement either after he’s won a second term as president or been voted out of office.
Top questions and answers now that the U.S. has decided to leave the Paris climate accord

No treaty can be designed to avoid the constitutional requirements. The founders specifically designed our republic so the president could not take unilateral action on international agreements

NON BINDING AGREEMENT IS NOT A TREATY.

If it's "non-binding" then why did all you snowflakes have a gigantic hissy fit when Trump announced we were pulling out of it?

 

[bripat9643]

The OP assertion relies upon the Paris Accord indeed being a treaty under U.S. law and not within the scope of what is called "sole executive agreement" (SOE). Though I'm not an attorney, I know enough to know the determination on whether the Accord does or does not fall within SOE purview is what determines whether the U.S. needed to ratify it as it would a treaty.

• Substance, not form is what matters in determining whether the Paris Accord is, under U.S. law. A treaty's name -- "accord," "treaty," or "apple pie" -- is not probative for settling the question. Mere naming does not form the basis for establishing comity on the matter.
• How other countries handle the document does not define the way in which the U.S. should or must do.
• It's well understood that the U.S. legal meaning and application of the term "treaty" is vastly narrower than is that which most other nations apply in their own jurisprudential systems. That said, the matter of what is and is not a treat under U.S. law is far from settled.
  • Treaty vs. Executive Agreement
    
  • Unratified Treaties, Domestic Politics, and the U.S. Constitution
    
  • The Case for Executive Agreements and Climate Protection Authority
    
  • Executive Expediency and Executive Agreements
    
  • The Treaty That Is Not a Treaty (Or An Executive Agreement)
    
  • International Executive Agreements: Their Constitutionality, Scope and Effect
    
    Any meaningful answer to the quest for a delineation of the scope of the President's power to conclude internationally binding agreements has not been, and very probably cannot be, formulated in terms of constitutional doctrine. It must be based, rather, on a realistic appraisal of this country's needs in the domain of international relations. In this sense it is not incompatible with constitutional principles for the President to be accorded a broad degree of discretion over foreign affairs. He is in a better position to act more expediently than Congress, whose members are elected on the basis of their competence and knowledge of local issues. An isolationist may be chagrined at this statement, but we are not living in an isolationist world.

To the best of my knowledge, the SCOTUS has not ruled on the legitimacy of the Paris Accord's being within the scope of SOE. It has, however, prohibited the implementation of carbon restrictions pursuant to the Accord. The result of that decision, ironically, puts the U.S. in the position that conservatives feared other nations would take, thus being the reason for not participating in it.

It's a fucking treaty. Whatever this SOE thing is, it sounds blatantly unconstitutional. The president has no authority to bind the U.S. to any international agreements of any kind without Senate approval.

The quote below is where the author of you reference admits it is unconstitutional:

Any meaningful answer to the quest for a delineation of the scope of the President's power to conclude internationally binding agreements has not been, and very probably cannot be, formulated in terms of constitutional doctrine. It must be based, rather, on a realistic appraisal of this country's needs in the domain of international relations. In this sense it is not incompatible with constitutional principles for the President to be accorded a broad degree of discretion over foreign affairs. He is in a better position to act more expediently than Congress, whose members are elected on the basis of their competence and knowledge of local issues. An isolationist may be chagrined at this statement, but we are not living in an isolationist world.​

 

[JakeStarkey]

I honestly believe Trump is retarded. He is beyond dumb.

Trump needs to do his job by naming ambassador nominees, a Democratic Senate aide responds.

Trump Blames Democrats For Blocking Nominees He Hasn't Even Picked Yet

Many would say the same thing about you. Perhaps you would be prudent to be more compassionate and merciful with how you judge others.

As Trump is, avatar?

How can we expect.to have a better leader than trump if we aren't better people than he is?

That is the point. We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

We can change that

Probably not until a great series of trials come upon us, much like the GD and WWII. That's a sorry training cycle, that one generation can't learn from the previous ones.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

You speak for yourself well.

I identify the Alt Right and Far Right in particular. You are the shame of America. You want to go back to bad ways our ancestors so recently tried to eliminate. But you go back to the bad ways.

Freedom? Virtue? The constitution? Reason?
When did those become bad?

That is not what the Alt Right and a good number of the Far Right want. And American as an overwhelming majority want nothing to do with libertarianism as the last thirty years have shown.

 

[ScienceRocks]

We as a people are not the equal of our grand parents or great grand parents. We are no longer exceptional, and that shows in who we elect as leaders.

You speak for yourself well.

I identify the Alt Right and Far Right in particular. You are the shame of America. You want to go back to bad ways our ancestors so recently tried to eliminate. But you go back to the bad ways.

Freedom? Virtue? The constitution? Reason?
When did those become bad?

Let me see, you oppose freedom for some people and fight actively to stop people from doing as they wish with their own life...(Transgenderism, Gays, and many other things).

Constitution? Don't make me laugh. The constitution doesn't say that we're the only country on this planet that can't invest in our infrastructure or educate our children. Get serious man.And the constitution doesn't allow for you to ban any one group of people from coming into this country. Sorry but your understanding of the constitution should be embarrassing to you.

Reason? You really think you own reason? I am laughing at you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No, little Bri, it's not a Treaty. Tough but there it is.