Obama warns congress not to stop him on Iran "deal"

[Roadrunner]

The President does NOT have authority to create a binding deal with a foreign power without the approval of the Senate. No matter what he claims.

Actually, yes he does.

But only as an 'Executive Agreement' that can be overturned by the next President.

the Lying Cocksucker in Chief is counting on getting this SHIT deal pushed through, getting it approved by the commies and totalitarian scum at the UN and tying the hands of the next President.

Then, when the next President decides he or she want to shit-can the deal, it will be VERY difficult.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth, people.

I keep telling you that.

Doesn't matter anyway, the mullahs are killing this non-deal.

 

[Siete]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

 

[OKTexas]

It is not binding however .

And it can't remove sanctions put in place by law, only a treaty can do that.

That's not true. You can give us the law on it if you want.

In 1995, the United States Congress passed the Iran–Libya Sanctions Act .............

In response to the election of Iranian reformist President Mohammad Khatami, President Clinton eased sanctions on Iran. A debate in the U.S. Congress on whether to allow the expiration of ILSA, which some legislators argued hindered bilateral relations, and others argued would be seen as a concession on an effective program, ended on 5 August 2001, with its renewal by the Congress and signing into law by President George W. Bush.[5]

U.S. sanctions against Iran - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

No matter how powerful you think your dear leader is, legislative authority is still vested in Congress.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The President has sole authority to negotiate an executive agreement.

The President has sole authority to negotiate a treaty, which must be submitted to the Senate for advice and consent.

No treaty is binding on the US UNTIL and UNLESS the Senate agrees to it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It is not binding however .

And it can't remove sanctions put in place by law, only a treaty can do that.

That's not true. You can give us the law on it if you want.

Congress placed the sanctions and congress must remove them or a treaty agreed to by the Senate. Not an executive agreement.

 

[Siete]

The President has sole authority to negotiate an executive agreement.

The President has sole authority to negotiate a treaty, which must be submitted to the Senate for advice and consent.

No treaty is binding on the US UNTIL and UNLESS the Senate agrees to it.

ok, you can't read.

Next contestant please.

 

[HenryBHough]

We have here a president who doesn't want to cautioned that he is making a fool of himself. He doesn't want to hear a single word of caution. He'd rather just make a fool of himself then dare anyone to notice.

 

[Antares]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

(smile)

"Because executive agreements are made on the authority of the incumbent president, they do not necessarily bind his successors."

executive agreement international law Encyclopedia Britannica

There ya go 7.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is not binding however .

And it can't remove sanctions put in place by law, only a treaty can do that.

That's not true. You can give us the law on it if you want.

In 1995, the United States Congress passed the Iran–Libya Sanctions Act .............

In response to the election of Iranian reformist President Mohammad Khatami, President Clinton eased sanctions on Iran. A debate in the U.S. Congress on whether to allow the expiration of ILSA, which some legislators argued hindered bilateral relations, and others argued would be seen as a concession on an effective program, ended on 5 August 2001, with its renewal by the Congress and signing into law by President George W. Bush.[5]

U.S. sanctions against Iran - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

No matter how powerful you think your dear leader is, legislative authority is still vested in Congress.

Of course, as executive authority is still vested in your dear leader.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The President has sole authority to negotiate an executive agreement.

The President has sole authority to negotiate a treaty, which must be submitted to the Senate for advice and consent.

No treaty is binding on the US UNTIL and UNLESS the Senate agrees to it.

No one has said anything differently.

Please focus.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is not binding however .

And it can't remove sanctions put in place by law, only a treaty can do that.

That's not true. You can give us the law on it if you want.

Congress placed the sanctions and congress must remove them or a treaty agreed to by the Senate. Not an executive agreement.

Check the language of the treaty, RGS.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I don't need to, no treaty is binding until the Senate agrees to it. The president can not change what the Congress has created without getting them to agree.

 

[Siete]

It is not binding however .

And it can't remove sanctions put in place by law, only a treaty can do that.

That's not true. You can give us the law on it if you want.

Congress placed the sanctions and congress must remove them or a treaty agreed to by the Senate. Not an executive agreement.

Check the language of the treaty, RGS.

Gunny can't read. You might as well be addressing the rug on the floor.

 

[OKTexas]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

So you're saying the authority was invented and has no constitutional basis? And you idiots still insist that we a constitutional republic. Between the executive and the courts our Constitution has been destroyed, and people like you are OK with that.

 

[Siete]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

So you're saying the authority was invented and has no constitutional basis? And you idiots still insist that we a constitutional republic. Between the executive and the courts our Constitution has been destroyed, and people like you are OK with that.

that's exactly what it says, and has nothing to do with the constitution. ..durrrrrr

how F'n stupid are RW's anyway

 

[HenryBHough]

Petulant children do not grow up to become petulant adults.

They just don't grow up.

 

[Clementine]

But let a Republican president circumvent a Democratic Congress and see what happens.

There will be a shit storm any time they don't get their way.

 

[OKTexas]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

So you're saying the authority was invented and has no constitutional basis? And you idiots still insist that we a constitutional republic. Between the executive and the courts our Constitution has been destroyed, and people like you are OK with that.

that's exactly what it says, and has nothing to do with the constitution. ..durrrrrr

how F'n stupid are RW's anyway

The only stupidity displayed here is yours, all powers of the federal government are granted by the Constitution, if it's not there they don't have it, that applies to all three branches. If something carries the same wight legally as a treaty, it must be approved by the senate.

 

[Siete]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

So you're saying the authority was invented and has no constitutional basis? And you idiots still insist that we a constitutional republic. Between the executive and the courts our Constitution has been destroyed, and people like you are OK with that.

that's exactly what it says, and has nothing to do with the constitution. ..durrrrrr

how F'n stupid are RW's anyway

The only stupidity displayed here is yours, all powers of the federal government are granted by the Constitution, if it's not there they don't have it, that applies to all three branches. If something carries the same wight legally as a treaty, it must be approved by the senate.

really?

a treaty requires Congress
a legislative executive agreement requires congress
an executive agreement gives the POTUS to power to act without Congress

those are FACTS

anything you can say or do otherwise is partisan horseshit. Don't call me stupid when you don't know what you're talking about.

 

[OKTexas]

It is not binding however .

An executive agreement is an agreement entered into between a foreign government and the executive branch of the United States. Although the agreement binds the United States with as much force as a treaty, it is not actually as formal as a treaty and does not require Senate approval. Interestingly, executive agreements not authorized by Congress are not binding on subsequent presidents, because they are entered into only by the power of the president that enters into them.

Authority to Enter into an Executive Agreement
The president of the United States possesses the authority to enter into executive agreements. However, this power does not derive from the U.S. Constitution. The power to enter into a particular executive agreement flows from one of two sources, either (1) authorization by Congress or (2) the president's inherent power to manage foreign relations with other countries. The U.S. Supreme Court determined that executive agreements hold the same weight as treaties in its 1937 decision in United States v. Belmont, 301 U.S. 324.

Examples of Executive Agreement Use
Use of executive agreements gained popularity after 1939. In fact, before 1940, presidents made approximately 1,200 executive agreements and signed almost 800 treaties. However, from 1940-1989, the presidents entered into more than 13,000 executive agreements, and still signed only 800 treaties. The following are examples of executive agreements that presidents have entered into.


more?

So you're saying the authority was invented and has no constitutional basis? And you idiots still insist that we a constitutional republic. Between the executive and the courts our Constitution has been destroyed, and people like you are OK with that.

that's exactly what it says, and has nothing to do with the constitution. ..durrrrrr

how F'n stupid are RW's anyway

The only stupidity displayed here is yours, all powers of the federal government are granted by the Constitution, if it's not there they don't have it, that applies to all three branches. If something carries the same wight legally as a treaty, it must be approved by the senate.

really?

a treaty requires Congress
a legislative executive agreement requires congress
an executive agreement gives the POTUS to power to act without Congress

those are FACTS

anything you can say or do otherwise is partisan horseshit. Don't call me stupid when you don't know what you're talking about.

I know exactly what I'm talking about, you are the one playing a semantics game by saying the president can negotiate an agreement, which is for all intents and purposes is a treaty and can avoid congressional scrutiny by simply putting another label on it. Sorry bubba i think that violates both the letter and spirit of the Constitution and the intended checks and balances put in place by the founders, which were put there just for circumstance like this.