Traitor's letter shows ignorance of US law

[BULLDOG]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Traitor's letter shows ignorance of US law

The fact you and your fellow sheep keep referring to them as traitors only accents your own gross ignorance. If sending a letter to Iran is treason, then by all means, let's discuss treasonous politicians in your party, Dudley.

5 times Democrats undermined Republican presidents with foreign governments WashingtonExaminer.com

 

[chikenwing]

Your Dear Leader has behaved like a childish Dictator wannabe. He blew it when he started boasting about not needing Congress. There is no goodwill left. And he's solely to blame for it.

Can you name even one day during our president's administration when there was "good will" ? The right has opposed him every day about every thing. Trying to blame him for that is stupid, and only believed by teabaggers. The sane world knows what happened.

Hey Bulldorf, It was Obama who refused to work with Republicans, remember?

You are confused.

He doesn't seem confused. The more likely explanation is that you're lying. BTW, the good will evaporated when Obama announced that Republicans needed to ride in the "back of the bus".

Can you name even one day when the right has been willing to do anything but fight Obama any way possible? Not the first day when they had a meeting and decided to oppose everything, no matter what..........Not today.........And no day in between.

So what has the hite house done? Bottom line there sparky,your guy got his ass handed to him,elections have consequences.

 

[BULLDOG]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Absolutely false and a cynically partisan motivated lie.

Which part would you care to try to disprove?

Well all of it is shit,like Obama's goal is not to let them get a nuke,he admits that it just delays,on the other hand rational people understand it to be 100% opposite of what you think you know.
Obmas deal is a can kicked down the road,its a shit deal,get over it,and try and at least be honest with yourself

Only delays them getting a weapon? You got a credible source for that? Something non-fox?

 

[chikenwing]

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap
When you see nonsense like this you know your dealing with a hack

 

[EatMorChikin]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

Unlike you, I don't need news sources to feed me my talking points. I am well aware of this evil administration. You on the other hand are nothing more than a partisan hack.

 

[Rambunctious]

Traitor??? the only traitor's I see are in the Dumocunt party,

 

[Antares]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

No, we don't trust him because he is an incompetent pig fucker.

 

[chikenwing]

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Absolutely false and a cynically partisan motivated lie.

Which part would you care to try to disprove?

Well all of it is shit,like Obama's goal is not to let them get a nuke,he admits that it just delays,on the other hand rational people understand it to be 100% opposite of what you think you know.
Obmas deal is a can kicked down the road,its a shit deal,get over it,and try and at least be honest with yourself

Only delays them getting a weapon? You got a credible source for that? Something non-fox?

s
The president himself,all of the supporting cast of Harvard professors, anyone that has ears and half a brain sees it for what it is. The simple fact that after 10 years there are no restrictions,nothing,yep a heck of a deal.
A far number of Dems in the Senate,the list goes on.

 

[BULLDOG]

Can you name even one day during our president's administration when there was "good will" ? The right has opposed him every day about every thing. Trying to blame him for that is stupid, and only believed by teabaggers. The sane world knows what happened.

Hey Bulldorf, It was Obama who refused to work with Republicans, remember?

You are confused.

He doesn't seem confused. The more likely explanation is that you're lying. BTW, the good will evaporated when Obama announced that Republicans needed to ride in the "back of the bus".

Can you name even one day when the right has been willing to do anything but fight Obama any way possible? Not the first day when they had a meeting and decided to oppose everything, no matter what..........Not today.........And no day in between.

So what has the hite house done? Bottom line there sparky,your guy got his ass handed to him,elections have consequences.

Weren't we discussing how the right wing claims Obama destroyed "good will"? Why are you running from that?

 

[Rambunctious]

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap

I bet you have never watched FOX NEWS. Try it and learn something! MSNBC has brain locked you. MSNBC is all lie's and cover up...turn that crap off and grow up!

 

[BULLDOG]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

No, we don't trust him because he is an incompetent pig fucker.

Then quit bending over and squealing every time he walks by.

 

[chikenwing]

discussing???!!! bwhahahaah thats rich

 

[Antares]

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

No, we don't trust him because he is an incompetent pig fucker.

Then quit bending over and squealing every time he walks by.

You must really enjoy the taste of Bammy jizz.

 

[BULLDOG]

No surprise that they don't understand how our system of government works. Remember when they passed that bill that said that after so many days, if the Senate didn't act on it, it would automatically become law? They should hire a middle school civics teacher to advise them in such matters or at least consult School House Rock occasionally.

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

rat·i·fy
ˈradəˌfī/
verb

1. sign or give formal consent to (a treaty, contract, or agreement), making it officially valid.
   synonyms: confirm, approve, sanction, endorse, agree to, accept, uphold, authorize,formalize, validate, recognize;
   sign
   "they failed to ratify the amendment"

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

Unlike you, I don't need news sources to feed me my talking points. I am well aware of this evil administration. You on the other hand are nothing more than a partisan hack.

No news sources? I guess it's just you and the voices in your head.

 

[BULLDOG]

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Absolutely false and a cynically partisan motivated lie.

Which part would you care to try to disprove?

Well all of it is shit,like Obama's goal is not to let them get a nuke,he admits that it just delays,on the other hand rational people understand it to be 100% opposite of what you think you know.
Obmas deal is a can kicked down the road,its a shit deal,get over it,and try and at least be honest with yourself

Only delays them getting a weapon? You got a credible source for that? Something non-fox?

s
The president himself,all of the supporting cast of Harvard professors, anyone that has ears and half a brain sees it for what it is. The simple fact that after 10 years there are no restrictions,nothing,yep a heck of a deal.
A far number of Dems in the Senate,the list goes on.

It's a ten year treaty. Who says there will be nothing later?
.Get over it

 

[EatMorChikin]

So in your view Obama can unilaterally agree with Iran?

It's the right wing who is agreeing with hard line Iranians. Obama, along with 5 other countries who are equally involved, is trying to negotiate a treaty to prevent a nuclear armed Iran. The right hates Obama so much till they are willing to increase Iran's chances of developing a weapon just to act like a dick toward Obama. The entire world recognizes the right wing's childish behavior for what it is, but it does reduce US credibility.

Yeah lets trust someone who hasn't done one thing positive in 6 years, to actually get a legit deal done. A fucking community organizer is going to stop Iran from developing nukes, yeah right. And at this point, I don't even believe he wants to stop Iran from development. Everything he has done has been has been a black mark on the American people. But we should just trust him, now, HA!

Of course you don't trust him. After all, you believe all that stupid fox crap.

Unlike you, I don't need news sources to feed me my talking points. I am well aware of this evil administration. You on the other hand are nothing more than a partisan hack.

No news sources? I guess it's just you and the voices in your head.

I have my sources, and that is no fucking business of yours. I mostly listen to music and play guitar.

I get the truth, I am sure of that.

 

[chikenwing]

Absolutely false and a cynically partisan motivated lie.

Which part would you care to try to disprove?

Well all of it is shit,like Obama's goal is not to let them get a nuke,he admits that it just delays,on the other hand rational people understand it to be 100% opposite of what you think you know.
Obmas deal is a can kicked down the road,its a shit deal,get over it,and try and at least be honest with yourself

Only delays them getting a weapon? You got a credible source for that? Something non-fox?

s
The president himself,all of the supporting cast of Harvard professors, anyone that has ears and half a brain sees it for what it is. The simple fact that after 10 years there are no restrictions,nothing,yep a heck of a deal.
A far number of Dems in the Senate,the list goes on.

It's a ten year treaty. Who says there will be nothing later?
.Get over it

This treaty don't be so dense.kicking the nuke can down the road,will ensure they get a nuke,evry rational person on earth knows that, along with Iran.
The president can not do this alone,despite his efforts.

 

[deltex1]

I'm not the constitution or legal authority that so many on the board purport to be but it looks like it really is Amateur Hour at the Senate.



The letter states that “the Senate must ratify [a treaty] by a two-thirds vote.” But as the Senate’s own web page makes clear: “The Senate does not ratify treaties. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification” (my emphasis). Or, as this outstanding 2001 CRS Report on the Senate’s role in treaty-making states (at 117): “It is the President who negotiates and ultimately ratifies treaties for the United States, but only if the Senate in the intervening period gives its advice and consent.” Ratification is the formal act of the nation’s consent to be bound by the treaty on the international plane. Senate consent is a necessary but not sufficient condition of treaty ratification for the United States. As the CRS Report notes: “When a treaty to which the Senate has advised and consented … is returned to the President,” he may “simply decide not to ratify the treaty.”


This is a technical point that does not detract from the letter’s message that any administration deal with Iran might not last beyond this presidency. (I analyzed this point here last year.) But in a letter purporting to teach a constitutional lesson, the error is embarrassing.

The letter should have been coordinated with Hillary. She knows the law.

 

[eagle7_31]

I'm not the constitution or legal authority that so many on the board purport to be but it looks like it really is Amateur Hour at the Senate.



The letter states that “the Senate must ratify [a treaty] by a two-thirds vote.” But as the Senate’s own web page makes clear: “The Senate does not ratify treaties. Instead, the Senate takes up a resolution of ratification, by which the Senate formally gives its advice and consent, empowering the president to proceed with ratification” (my emphasis). Or, as this outstanding 2001 CRS Report on the Senate’s role in treaty-making states (at 117): “It is the President who negotiates and ultimately ratifies treaties for the United States, but only if the Senate in the intervening period gives its advice and consent.” Ratification is the formal act of the nation’s consent to be bound by the treaty on the international plane. Senate consent is a necessary but not sufficient condition of treaty ratification for the United States. As the CRS Report notes: “When a treaty to which the Senate has advised and consented … is returned to the President,” he may “simply decide not to ratify the treaty.”

The only reason this is an issue is because its a GOP Congress questioning a Democrat President (heaven forbid)if the party labels were reversed you would have no problem.


This is a technical point that does not detract from the letter’s message that any administration deal with Iran might not last beyond this presidency. (I analyzed this point here last year.) But in a letter purporting to teach a constitutional lesson, the error is embarrassing.