Iran Schools 47 GOP Senators

On international law.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/09/tom-cotton-zarif-letter_n_6835538.html?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000592

In short…

The Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif told those evil Republicans that international law trumps the U.S. Constitution.

The Senate has to ratify treaties (not to mention some of the sanctions imposed on Iran are enshrined in law, which can only be undone by Congress). Thus, Congress has a significant voice in the arena of foreign affairs. While the entire Congress may not be prepared to act on the matter currently, the fact remains that Congress is not unified on this matter, which means that there is no national unity on this issue.

The 47 U.S. Senators who signed this letter had every right to do so. Ultimately, the Congress does play an important role in the arena of foreign affairs, and individual members of Congress owe no deference to the executive branch when it comes to supporting/opposing a particular plan or speaking out on such a plan. No, these members cannot stop the president from negotiating with Iran on this matter, but they are free to express their position on negotiations. If the purpose of the letter is to cause negotiations to fail, so be it.

Why is Obama negotiating with a terrorist state when he can’t negotiate with Congress?

From YOUR article:

It was Cotton who drew flak. The State Department official who emailed The Huffington Post called Cotton's stunt "profoundly contrary to U.S. interests." Obama told reporters he saw the GOP effort as an example of "some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran."

Does it make sense to forge an agreement with what the US calls, "The worst of the Terrorist entities"—while knowing they can't be expected to comply with its terms? Most of our troops were killed or grievously-wounded by IEDs—IEDs that were developed by Iran, and spread throughout the "Arab Spring".



.

This reckless letter is without any known precedent and was not signed by the Senate Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker! It is clearly spelled out in the Constitution and Supreme Court case law that all foreign affairs is the responsibility of the Executive Branch!

Obama does not need the approval of Congress to strike a deal with Iran, and that was clearly stated in the letter!

I find it absolutely amazing that the party in control of the United States Congress is undermining our foreign affairs at the direction of the Prime Minister of Israel!

This Congress will turn out to be the worst in American history!!

Hillary in 2016!!

The NY Daily News doesn't mince words!!

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/nydn-blasts-gop-senators-iran-traitors

News Buzzard wrote:"...This reckless letter is without any known precedent..."

Actually, the National-Socialists provided two precedents.



.

News Buzzard wrote:This reckless letter is without any known precedent and was not signed by the Senate Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Bob Corker! It is clearly spelled out in the Constitution and Supreme Court case law that all foreign affairs is the responsibility of the Executive Branch!

Obama does not need the approval of Congress to strike a deal with Iran, and that was clearly stated in the letter!

I find it absolutely amazing that the party in control of the United States Congress is undermining our foreign affairs at the direction of the Prime Minister of Israel!

This Congress will turn out to be the worst in American history!!

Hillary in 2016!!

LWNJ Poutrage is funny.


Despite your rebuttal, you failed to prove they violated any US statute. Furthermore, many will see this as what happens when a President has become the lamest of lame ducks, who has lost support of the majority of the population, and who can no longer set direction for congress.

What is lost in all the false outrage: is this: What the Senators said was true. Without confirmation by the Congress, any deal that Obama signs with the Iranians isn't worth the paper it was written on.


One must remember disagreeing with the president is not treason, and Congress is not subservient to the president.

So in your eyes the idiot in the Whitehouse is the one that should be playing politics. Playing, the operative word, as the community organizer has demonstrated disasterous lies in the wake of his foreign dabbling.

As for politics, Obama is giving away the farm for the sole purpose of his 'legacy'.

Kerry and Obama or should we say, Valerie Jarrett, are more of a comedy team that is alienating any friends and allies we had in the Middle East. Even the Iranian opposition to the mullahs, who Obama abandoned at a critical moment, has a serious problem with Obama’s 'negotiations' with Iran.

There are no violations of law or the Constitution in sending this letter (though perhaps it is against "protocol," but since when has Obama ever cared about protocol?).

Outerlimits wrote:What is lost in all the false outrage: is this: What the Senators said was true. Without confirmation by the Congress, any deal that Obama signs with the Iranians isn't worth the paper it was written on.

It's quite apparent that the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, Bob Corker, would disagree with you:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-iran-letter-backfires

Also, Republican Senator, Jeff Flake, would disagree with you:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/flake-iran-letter-not-productive

The letter, signed by the 47 Senators, is in clear violation of the Logan Act of 1799:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act

But the all knowing author of the Right Wing Book Of Mythology, Outerlimits, knows more than everybody else!!! (NOT)

Hillary in 2016!!

News Buzzard wrote:The letter, signed by the 47 Senators, is in clear violation of the Logan Act of 1799:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act

But the all knowing author of the Right Wing Book Of Mythology, Outerlimits, knows more than everybody else!!! (NOT)

Hillary in 2016!!

You are the one who is wrong:

The Republicans are not negotiating there for they are not in violation of the Logan Act. They sent the letter by mail. That is indirect, it was not an instigation of a dialogue. The Senate provided important information about how our Constitution and our government works and that is it.  International law does not dictate the power of the President, he does not have the authority to enter into a legally binding agreement without a 2/3 vote by the Senate to begin with. /end of story.

[W]hile the Constitution reserves foreign policy for the federal government, it gives the states—as represented by their Senators—an indirect but potent influence over the making of foreign policy.

— The Heritage Foundation

Obama is attempting to act on his own here. He does not have that authority. Under those circumstances, the Senators were acting in the interest of the United States (and within their authority) to advise Iran that this "deal" must be approved by them, per our Constitution.

You may not like it. But that is our system.

Like News Hawk stated: this has been done before.


I will take Obama Hypocrisy for 1000 please.

Barack Obama 'tried to undermine George W Bush's Iraq negotiations'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/barackobama/3170365/Barack-Obama-tried-to-undermine-George-W-Bushs-Iraq-negotiations.html

Correction: There are a slew of precedents:

Kerry went and negotiated face to face with Ortega when he was a senator.

And again with the Viet Cong in Paris.

And again later in Viet Nam.

And with the Castros in Cuba.

And Ted Kennedy's sellout to the Russian’s during Reagan’s presidency.

And Carter’s fooling around with the North Korean lunatics during the Bush years.

And the two Dim senators that tried to make nice with Saddam Hussein while our troops were massing on the Iraqi borders.

And Pelosi’s trip to play Assad’s fool in Syria.

According to Pajamas Media columnist Michael Ledeen, in 2008, a Democratic senator sent a personal emissary to Tehran encouraging the mullahs not to sign an agreement with the outgoing Bush Administration as negotiations would take on a much friendlier tone following President Bush’s departure from office.

That senator was a presidential candidate at the time. His name was Barack Obama.

Perhaps Biden’s loophole in making his 36-year representation is that the message Senator Obama allegedly sent was not in written form. It was a verbal message delivered to Tehran’s leadership by Ambassador William G. Miller, who assured an enemy who was at war with us that a President Obama would be much more amicable to deal with.
Breitbart

The 47 Senators who signed that letter are in direct violation of the Logan Act! It is very clearly defined in it's text.

In the end the Republicans will not have a veto proof majority to pass any monitoring legislation on any settlement we make with Iran, which Obama definitely has the authority to do on his own!. This will bite those 47 Senators in the arse!!  

The 47 traitors are getting plenty of negative press around the country!!

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/03/11/national-outrage-grows-22-newspaper-editorials-blast-senate-republican-letter-iran.html

Kerry: "We are not negotiating a legally binding plan" with Iran.

News Buzzard wrote:The 47 traitors are getting plenty of negative press around the country!!

Just when the Democrats think they have crawled out of the quagmire of scandals to proclaim one for the other side, another shoe drops on a Democrat's head.

This one snares a liberal media fanboy in addition to a legislator:

"Coming on the heels of the revelation that 47 Republican Senators sent a letter to Iran undermining President Obama’s ambitions in the country, I can now report to you that a number of Democrats, including the former Speaker, have engaged in the same behavior. They sent a letter to one of our clear adversaries and declared their opposition to the President’s foreign policy in the country and their opposition to American military action. Further, the Democrats sought assurances from the regime separate from the assurances and demands of the President’s Administration... this was actually from March 20, 1984. That is the day the Democratic Leader of the House and soon to be Speaker, Jim Wright, and a number of his congressional colleagues, sent a letter to communist leader “Commandante” Daniel Ortega. The press then too gave the “Dear Commandante” letter writers a pass in a way they refuse to give Republicans a pass. It is worth pointing out that the Speaker at the time of this letter was Tip O’Neil whose chief of staff was Chris Matthews. Matthews is now calling on the 47 Republicans to be prosecuted under the Logan Act. Neither he nor his boss objected to the “Dear Commandante” letter."

Let’s not forget the other SEVEN times DEMOCRATS advised enemies to oppose the President:

1. Senators John Sparkman (D-AL) and George McGovern (D-SD). The two Senators visited Cuba and met with government actors there in 1975.

2. Senator Teddy Kennedy (D-MA). In 1983, Teddy Kennedy sent emissaries to the Soviets to undermine Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy.

3. Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry jumped into the pro-Sandanista pool himself in 1985, when he traveled to Nicaragua to negotiate with the regime. He wasn’t alone; Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) joined him.

4. Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA), David Bonior (D-MI), and Mike Thompson (D-CA). In 2002, the three Congressmen visited Baghdad to play defense for Saddam Hussein’s regime.

5. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). In 2002, Rockefeller told Fox News’ Chris Wallace, “I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.”

6. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). In April 2007, as the Bush administration pursued pressure against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to visit him. There, according to The New York Times, the two “discussed a variety of Middle Eastern issues, including the situations in Iraq and Lebanon and the prospect of peace talks between Syria and Israel.”

7. Barack Obama 'tried to undermine George W Bush's Iraq negotiations'

News Buzzard wrote:The 47 Senators who signed that letter are in direct violation of the Logan Act! It is very clearly defined in it's text.

In the end the Republicans will not have a veto proof majority to pass any monitoring legislation on any settlement we make with Iran, which Obama definitely has the authority to do on his own!. This will bite those 47 Senators in the arse!!  

As I said, before Outerlimits changed the subject, the letter by the 47 Traitors just eliminated any chance of a veto proof majority on any ensuing legislation on Iran. That's the price they pay for being stupid!

Come on Buzzard, that is pure nonsense, the Senate had zero chance of passing the bill never mind overriding a veto. Who are you trying to fool? The remaining Senate Democrats are not going to make a move against Obama.


Obama is not acting in the best interests of the United States and has failed to recognize he is negotiating with terrorist (again).


Obama and Kerry are unleashing a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.


"We are getting in bed with a rattlesnake" — Pat Caddell.

It looks like Netanyahu is slipping in the polls and over a quarter of a million people have signed a petition to arrest the 47 Senators for treason, so I think the whole package of Iran stunts is backfiring on the GOP, as well it should!

Outer, if it was the Dems that wrote that letter it would be fine. If it was Bush that said Iran can have nuclear bombs in ten years, it would be just horrible in NB's eyes at least.

WHL wrote:Outer, if it was the Dems that wrote that letter it would be fine.  If it was Bush that said Iran can have nuclear bombs in ten years, it would be just horrible in NB's eyes at least.

The Dems didn't write that letter, and they didn't say that Iran can have nuclear bombs in 10 years. That's just the newest chapter in the Right Wing Book Of Mythology!

No. Obama said they can have the bomb in ten years.

WHL wrote:No.  Obama said they can have the bomb in ten years.  

I would like you to show me a link where Obama said that, and I'm not talking about some right wing website which assumed he said that. I know you hear a lot of people talk about a lot of things............

News Buzzard wrote:It looks like Netanyahu is slipping in the polls and over a quarter of a million people have signed a petition to arrest the 47 Senators for treason, so I think the whole package of Iran stunts is backfiring on the GOP, as well it should!

To quote your hero:

I wrote in 2012 that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had given a speech in which he said:

“The Iranian nation has never pursued and will never pursue nuclear weapons.

There is no doubt that the decision makers in the countries opposing us know well that Iran is not after nuclear weapons because the Islamic Republic, logically, religiously and theoretically, considers the possession of nuclear weapons a grave sin and believes the proliferation of such weapons is senseless, destructive and dangerous.”
http://www.juancole.com/2015/03/bombing-happen-their.html

Is this the truth, or taqiyya?



.

If you don't like this link, NB, there are plenty others.


http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-to-allow-iran-to-build-nuclear-weapons-10-years