Will Obama’s nuke deal need a two thirds approval vote by the Senate? Maybe not

[johnwk]

You're suggesting that the US will back out of the NPT under the next President?

OMG, has somebody come up with a pill that can fix poor reading comprehension THAT fast???

Again, you're lagging behind. Seriously, if you want to play with the grown ups, you've got to keep up.

If the P5+1 come to a deal with Iran, and the US backs out of it under the next President, (as you claim will happen), the US would be in violation of the NPT, and would have to withdraw.

You, sir, are full of crap. The only way your comment would have merit is if Obama's deal gets a two thirds approval vote.


And what was our Founders thinking with regard to presidential powers and deals with foreign countries? Their fear is expressed in Federalist No. 75 by Hamilton with regard to the President’s treaty making authority and sheds light on why the President was not granted an arbitrary power to make “CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law.” Hamilton points out the president


“might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”


So, as it turns out, the founders intentionally commanded by our Constitution, that any deals cooked up by the president with a foreign power would not have “the force of law” unless approved by two thirds of the Senators present.

JWK


The President shall have "Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur".

 

[johnwk]

You ought to wait until it happens before being so smug. Did we get to see TPP before passage? ACA?

The TransPacific trade agreement hasn't been passed yet, and the ACA was posted online for weeks before it was passed.

Seriously, keep up.

So sorry, TPA not TPP.

The TPA has been in effect off and on since the 70s, there's nothing secret about what's in it.

What does that have to do with our Constitution's command that any deals cooked up by our president with foreign powers needs a two thirds approval by our Senate? Has there been a constitutional amendment to change this requirement?

JWK



When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

You are aware that the Senate ratified the NPT in 1968, right?

There's your answer.

Your answer has nothing to do with what our Constitution commands. Got that?

JWK

 

[hortysir]

The TransPacific trade agreement hasn't been passed yet, and the ACA was posted online for weeks before it was passed.

Seriously, keep up.

So sorry, TPA not TPP.

The TPA has been in effect off and on since the 70s, there's nothing secret about what's in it.

What does that have to do with our Constitution's command that any deals cooked up by our president with foreign powers needs a two thirds approval by our Senate? Has there been a constitutional amendment to change this requirement?

JWK



When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

You are aware that the Senate ratified the NPT in 1968, right?

There's your answer.

Your answer has nothing to do with what our Constitution commands. Got that?

JWK

I repeat.....

Google the phrase

Sole Executive Agreement

If you want to single out Obama for it, fine.
But be prepared to be called a partisan hack for doing so

 

[The Rabbi]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification. In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.
BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

 

[The Rabbi]

What nuke deal is that?

Wake me up when one actually materializes.

Apparently, it's basically done. Looks like they'll be announcing it tomorrow.

Wonderful. Just wonderful. Kerry and Obama gives away the store and we cannot do anything about it? Watch the reaction of the leaders in Iran, They will be laughing that they tamed the Little Giant. Not much of a accomplishment actually.

Do you guys really not see the disconnect in trashing a treaty that you haven't seen as "giving away the store"?

Wait until the deal is released, at least then you can pretend that you're not just vomiting out anti-Obama talking points.

You understand that the administration has zero credibility, right? They've already given away the store, just from what we know. Obama is so desperate for anything he can wave around and call a treaty I am surprised he has not promised to negotiate the future status of Los Angeles as an Iranian colony.

 

[TooTall]

It's an executive deal, or compromise.
Not a treaty.
Congress plays no role

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

He has to have Congressional approval to lift the sanctions presently imposed on Iran.

 

[TooTall]

Did Reagan get two third approval of Congress when he traded arms for hostages?

That wasn't a treaty.

 

[johnwk]

So sorry, TPA not TPP.

The TPA has been in effect off and on since the 70s, there's nothing secret about what's in it.

What does that have to do with our Constitution's command that any deals cooked up by our president with foreign powers needs a two thirds approval by our Senate? Has there been a constitutional amendment to change this requirement?

JWK



When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

You are aware that the Senate ratified the NPT in 1968, right?

There's your answer.

Your answer has nothing to do with what our Constitution commands. Got that?

JWK

I repeat.....

Google the phrase

Sole Executive Agreement

If you want to single out Obama for it, fine.
But be prepared to be called a partisan hack for doing so

And I repeat, those words are not found in our Constitution.

JWK

 

[hortysir]

The TPA has been in effect off and on since the 70s, there's nothing secret about what's in it.

What does that have to do with our Constitution's command that any deals cooked up by our president with foreign powers needs a two thirds approval by our Senate? Has there been a constitutional amendment to change this requirement?

JWK



When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

You are aware that the Senate ratified the NPT in 1968, right?

There's your answer.

Your answer has nothing to do with what our Constitution commands. Got that?

JWK

I repeat.....

Google the phrase

Sole Executive Agreement

If you want to single out Obama for it, fine.
But be prepared to be called a partisan hack for doing so

And I repeat, those words are not found in our Constitution.

JWK

Neither is Pussy, but it's real

 

[johnwk]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification. In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.
BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

A-freaken-men!

But it is troubling to see how powerful our Fifth Column crowd has become.

JWK

When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

 

[Jackson]

It's an executive deal, or compromise.
Not a treaty.
Congress plays no role

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

He has to have Congressional approval to lift the sanctions presently imposed on Iran.

 

[Tehon]

The time to be making this particular constitutional argument would have been in 1996 when Congress bestowed the ability on the President to negotiate in a multi lateral fashion in order to implement sanctions on Iran.
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/isa_1996.pdf

“Sec. 4. Multilateral regime. “(a) Multilateral negotiations.--In order to further the objectives of section 3, the Congress urges the President to commence immediately diplomatic efforts, both in appropriate international fora such as the United Nations, and bilaterally with allies of the United States, to establish a multilateral sanctions regime against Iran, including provisions limiting the development of petroleum resources, that will inhibit Iran's efforts to carry out activities described in section 2.

Congress also gave the President a way to end the sanctions within the same act.

“Sec. 8. Termination of sanctions. “The requirement under section 5(a) to impose sanctions shall no longer have force or effect with respect to Iran if the President determines and certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that Iran-- “(1) has ceased its efforts to design, develop, manufacture, or acquire-- “(A) a nuclear explosive device or related materials and technology; “(B) chemical and biological weapons; and “(C) ballistic missiles and ballistic missile launch technology; “(2) has been removed from the list of countries the governments of which have been determined, for purposes of section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, to have repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism; and “(3) poses no significant threat to United States national security, interests, or allies.

 

[sarahgop]

There are a number of articles saying Obama has no intention to gain a two thirds approval vote from the Senate to have his deal agreed to.

For example see: How Obama Will Bypass Congress On His Iranian Nuclear Arms Deal

”Obama will claim that his deal with Iran is not a treaty but a "sole executive agreement" that requires no approval from Congress.’


Also see Can Republicans Block an Iran Deal?

”Still, because of the compromise Congress and the administration agreed to in the spring, opponents would need a two-thirds majority to block the deal, and that would require a large number of Democrats deserting the president.”

But to all those who support and defend our Constitution and reject the Washington Establishment’s intentional actions to subvert our Constitution's provisions, keep in mind the crystal clear language in our Constitution which requires a two third approval vote for any deal cooked up by Obama with foreign countries to become law. Not a two thirds needed vote to strike it down!

Our Constitution states the president shall have powe, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur

And why did our Founders require a two thirds approval vote? Hamilton points out in Federalist No. 75 , the president :

“might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”

So, as it turns out, the founders intentionally commanded by our Constitution, that any deals cooked up by the president with a foreign power would not have “the force of law” unless approved by a two thirds vote in the Senate.

JWK


When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?

Where have you been? senate reps lead by corker and mcconnell caved weeks ago. its reversed. reps need 67 votes to kill the deal.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What nuke deal is that?

Wake me up when one actually materializes.

Apparently, it's basically done. Looks like they'll be announcing it tomorrow.

Wonderful. Just wonderful. Kerry and Obama gives away the store and we cannot do anything about it? Watch the reaction of the leaders in Iran, They will be laughing that they tamed the Little Giant. Not much of a accomplishment actually.

Do you guys really not see the disconnect in trashing a treaty that you haven't seen as "giving away the store"?

Wait until the deal is released, at least then you can pretend that you're not just vomiting out anti-Obama talking points.

You understand that the administration has zero credibility, right? They've already given away the store, just from what we know. Obama is so desperate for anything he can wave around and call a treaty I am surprised he has not promised to negotiate the future status of Los Angeles as an Iranian colony.

You understand that as far as anyone is concerned, you have less credibility than Obama does?

Why don't you be specific at tell us what they've "given away" already?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification.

Says you. Historical precedent and the SCOTUS disagree.

In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.

The Corker deal allows Congress to vote on it - but they'll need 67% to overturn Obama's almost certain veto, should they not approve it.

BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

What else does your crystal ball tell you, oh great swami?

 

[eagle1462010]

What a great day it will be.....................Obama doesn't need the Senate to approve it..............meaning he could never do it but will do it anyway...............

Saying legally under Nuclear Non proliferation............a 40 year old act he can make deals that our representatives wouldn't agree with..........even though we don't know the details...........................

I'm sure it will turn out just as well as Bill's Deal with North Korea....................He promised no nukes there as well........................Whatever comes out of it...............Iran will not comply and will still proceed to get the Nukes...........................and we will lift sanctions more than likely...........as it's a secret..........to give them more money to do so...........

Look Look.........I got them to sign a piece of paper saying they will be nice.............HONEST.............Yeah it's really gonna work..........FOOLS.

 

[eagle1462010]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification.

Says you. Historical precedent and the SCOTUS disagree.

In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.

The Corker deal allows Congress to vote on it - but they'll need 67% to overturn Obama's almost certain veto, should they not approve it.

BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

What else does your crystal ball tell you, oh great swami?

aka You don't even know the deal and your getting tingling sensations up your leg................enjoy it..................He's a fool and it will never work.............and if you think it will work............then you are a fool as well................They will never honor it..............whatever the hell it is...................

 

[theDoctorisIn]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification.

Says you. Historical precedent and the SCOTUS disagree.

In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.

The Corker deal allows Congress to vote on it - but they'll need 67% to overturn Obama's almost certain veto, should they not approve it.

BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

What else does your crystal ball tell you, oh great swami?

aka You don't even know the deal and your getting tingling sensations up your leg................enjoy it..................He's a fool and it will never work.............and if you think it will work............then you are a fool as well................They will never honor it..............whatever the hell it is...................

I haven't expressed any support or opposition to the deal - because I don't know what it is yet.

You, on the other hand...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What a great day it will be.....................Obama doesn't need the Senate to approve it..............meaning he could never do it but will do it anyway...............

Saying legally under Nuclear Non proliferation............a 40 year old act he can make deals that our representatives wouldn't agree with..........even though we don't know the details...........................

I'm sure it will turn out just as well as Bill's Deal with North Korea....................He promised no nukes there as well........................Whatever comes out of it...............Iran will not comply and will still proceed to get the Nukes...........................and we will lift sanctions more than likely...........as it's a secret..........to give them more money to do so...........

Look Look.........I got them to sign a piece of paper saying they will be nice.............HONEST.............Yeah it's really gonna work..........FOOLS.

Is this supposed to be in English?

Perhaps you should sober up a little before you post.

 

[eagle1462010]

This has been gone over countless times already. It's settled.

Obama already has the authority to sign this treaty under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which was ratified by the Senate 40 years ago. It's a non-issue.

Wrong,
It is a Treaty under the meaning of the term in the Constitution, thus subject to ratification.

Says you. Historical precedent and the SCOTUS disagree.

In any case, Bob Corker hammered out a deal that also requires Congressional approval. If Obama fucks over the GOP in Congress he wont get anything done the rest of his term. Congress will declare the treaty null and void and act accordingly.

The Corker deal allows Congress to vote on it - but they'll need 67% to overturn Obama's almost certain veto, should they not approve it.

BUt it doesnt matter. The irananians have no intention of adhering to anything that restricts their activities. That much is clear. They will blow up this treaty as they've blown up previous ones. And they know Obama is in office only for another 18 months and after that is anyone's guess.

What else does your crystal ball tell you, oh great swami?

aka You don't even know the deal and your getting tingling sensations up your leg................enjoy it..................He's a fool and it will never work.............and if you think it will work............then you are a fool as well................They will never honor it..............whatever the hell it is...................

I haven't expressed any support or opposition to the deal - because I don't know what it is yet.

You, on the other hand...

So be it............

Do you really think Iran will Honor it, whatever the hell it is..........................hmm.