That GOP letter to Tehran

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

Blew up in those Pubtards faces :biglol

[ img ]


A letter from Senate Republicans to Iran’s leadership has divided the GOP and forced it to play defense, endangering the party’s chances of passing a new round of sanctions that would kill President Obama’s nuclear talks with Tehran.

The talks have long divided Democrats, and just last month it appeared nearly certain that Republicans would have enough votes in the Senate to override a presidential veto of new sanctions.

That has quickly changed, and the outrage over the letter from 47 Republicans to Tehran is threatening to scuttle Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) hopes of winning Senate approval of two bills that would hem in Obama’s talks with Iran.

The White House on Tuesday seized on the letter for a second day, lashing out at the Republicans who sent it and calling it a “reckless” and “misguided” stunt.

The New York Daily News used the headline “Traitors” with pictures of McConnell, possible GOP presidential candidates Sens. Ted Cruz (Texas) and Rand Paul (Ky.), and freshman Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), who spearheaded the letter.

The conservative Wall Street Journal’s editorial board also ripped the letter, calling it a “distraction” that let Obama change the subject.

GOP infighting over the letter — seven Republican senators did not sign it — burst into the open, with several Republicans criticizing their colleagues.

“It did not seem to me to be appropriate for us to be writing the ayatollah at this critical time during the negotiations, and frankly, I doubt very much that the ayatollah would be moved by an explanation of our constitutional system,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) told a group of reporters on Tuesday.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said the letter isn’t “helpful” or “productive.”

“These are tough enough negotiations as it stands,” he said. “And introducing this kind of letter, I didn’t think would be helpful.”

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) said he did not think the letter “was something that would help get us to an outcome that we’re seeking.” He also said it would not have been constructive for him to sign it and expressed surprise that so many Republican senators did back it.

“I just didn’t even realize until this weekend that it had the kind of momentum that it had,” he said.

Sens. Dan Coats (Ind.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Thad Cochran (Miss.) are the other four Republican senators who didn’t sign the letter.

Coats and Murkowski are up for reelection in 2016.

The Obama administration is seeking to reach a deal on a framework with Iran by the end of the month that would remove sanctions on that country in exchange for concessions meant to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon.

The U.S. is seeking commitments from Iran that would ensure vigorous inspections and limit the country’s ability to enrich uranium to the point where it would take one year for Iran to acquire enough nuclear fuel to develop a weapon if it broke an agreement.

Skeptics of Obama’s diplomacy with Iran exist in both parties, and a number of Democrats hailed a speech last week to Congress by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyah, who argued it would be impossible for Obama to negotiate a good deal with Iran that would keep Israel safe.

Netanyahu’s controversial address appeared to give Republicans some momentum, but Democrats in the Senate quickly balked at a plan by McConnell to hold a procedural vote this week on legislation sponsored by Corker and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) that would require Congress to review a proposed deal with Iran before it could be approved.

The Corker-Menendez bill itself is seen as a softer approach to a bill from Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and Menendez that would restore and impose new sanctions if no deal is reached, or if Iran violates the deal. The sanctions bill appeared to have a veto-proof majority earlier this year.

Now, it’s not clear it would get 60 votes.

Democrats went to the Senate floor on Monday to denounce the Cotton letter, which suggested that any deal with Iran could be undone after Obama leaves the White House in 2017.

Vice President Biden, a former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations panel, said the letter “threatens to undermine” the president’s ability to negotiate with other countries.

“The senators’ letter, in the guise of a constitutional lesson, ignores two centuries of precedent and threatens to undermine the ability of any future American President, whether Democrat or Republican, to negotiate with other nations on behalf of the United States,” he said in a statement Monday night.

Even former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking at a New York press conference about the controversy over her private email account, sought to hammer the GOP. She said the letter was “out of step with the best traditions of American leadership.”

In a statement, Coats pointed to the need to end the partisanship in order for Republicans to win the policy battle.

“Though we may disagree on tactics, we all recognize that bipartisan support is necessary to override President Obama’s promised veto,” he said in a statement.

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

Kerry calls Iran letter 'irresponsible' and 'flat wrong' :ROFL2

Kerry called that assertion that an executive agreement could be voided or modified by Congress "flat wrong," and said executive agreements were an important foreign policy tool.

The letter ignores "200 years" of conduct of foreign policy, and risk undermining the confidence of all foreign governments in committing to executive agreements, Kerry said.

Good work boys :lolthumb
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/kerry-calls-iran-letter-irresponsible-and-flat-wrong/ar-AA9Ew0K

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

i hope they charge all 47 with treason. it might send a messsage to all of them screwing up on both sides of the aisle.

:clap

[ericberry14]

i hope they charge all 47 with treason. it might send a messsage to all of them screwing up on both sides of the aisle.

You are such a dumb piece of shit

You mention both sides yet if it was charging Obama with treason or all the democrats in the senate I doubt you'd support it. Pretty much shut the fuck up retard

[ericberry14]

i do not see you winning any awards unless its that huge ass nose and chin combo you got.............keep trying

.... This is all you cab say because you are fuckin retarded. You are a biased unemployed piece of shit who lives off taxpayer money. Pathetic dude. Kill yourself. It's ok you'll never be as good looking as me... No one here will, just murder yourself retard

[Muck FcDisney]

An Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran:

It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system. Thus, we are writing to bring to your attention two features of our Constitution — the power to make binding international agreements and the different character of federal offices — which you should seriously consider as negotiations progress.

First, under our Constitution, while the president negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratifying them. In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote. A so-called congressional-executive agreement requires a majority vote in both the House and the Senate (which, because of procedural rules, effectively means a three-fifths vote in the Senate). Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement.

Second, the offices of our Constitution have different characteristics.

For example, the president may serve only two 4-year terms, whereas senators may serve an unlimited number of 6-year terms. As applied today, for instance, President Obama will leave office in January 2017, while most of us will remain in office well beyond then — perhaps decades.

What these two constitutional provisions mean is that we will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.

We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress.


ZOMG, TREASON! :crazy

[img2]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/20/d3/80/20d3802dc9eacc277ba406758b4e004e.jpg[/img2]

[Muck FcDisney]

Pundits and legal scholars are raising questions over whether Sen. Tom Cotton and the 46 Senate Republicans violated the Logan Act when they penned a letter to Iran's leaders on Monday, undercutting President Barack Obama's efforts to negotiate a nuclear agreement with those same leaders. The law, passed in 1799, forbids any U.S. citizen -- acting without official U.S. authority -- from influencing "disputes or controversies" involving the U.S. and a foreign government.

But a quick look at the law's track record isn't exactly shudder-inducing: 216 years on the books have resulted in just one indictment and zero prosecutions.

President Ronald Reagan accused Rev. Jesse Jackson in 1984 of violating the Logan Act when Jackson traveled to Moscow to press the Soviets for the release of a political prisoner. And in 1987, House Speaker Jim Wright led his own diplomatic foray on Nicaragua, when he clashed with the Reagan administration over the U.S.'s policy toward Nicaragua and met personally with the president of the Nicaragua's Sandinista government. Most recently, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was accused in 2007 of violating the Logan Act when she traveled to Syria to meet with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, clashing with the Bush administration's policy. And House Speaker John Boehner's decision to invite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to directly rebuke Obama's foreign policy in a joint address to Congress also drew fire on the Logan front.

But those accusations never gained enough steam (or perhaps legal standing) to turn into judicial inquiries. It's a familiar refrain, said Steve Vladeck, a constitutional law professor at American University.

"Every time a member of Congress does something in the foreign policy sphere that's at odds with the president, someone trots out the Logan Act," Vladeck said.

And he doesn't believe the Logan Act would hold up in court if, say, the Justice Department decided to indict Cotton -- a move everyone agrees is practically and politically completely untenable.




I wouldn't get your hopes up, wackos... :surrender

[JdPat04]

Aubie said the Hilary stuff was to turn our attention away from this....

Yet I posted the Hilary thread and then YankeeClinton posted this thread and those 2 stared :jerkit to each other in this thread :biglol

[semperfi4727]

Since when was following the constitution treason :dunno

[FSUKW]

i hope they charge all 47 with treason. it might send a messsage to all of them screwing up on both sides of the aisle.

You are such a dumb piece of shit

You mention both sides yet if it was charging Obama with treason or all the democrats in the senate I doubt you'd support it. Pretty much shut the fuck up retard

:clap

[JdPat04]

Since when was following the constitution treason :dunno

Every day if you're a democrat

[ericberry14]

You are a liar and a fucking moron

[JdPat04]

you fuckers assume a lot. i would be pissed if the dems did it as well. and n o i do not get excited when the repukes charge of keep saying obama is breaking the law. only thing is the things obama has done the repukes have done as well as and more than twice as often. so spare me the holier than thou bullshit. how many billions have the repukes cost this country in shutdowns and stupid lawsuits? how many of the repuke golden boys used social security growing up only to try come up with a plan to do away with it now that they do not need it.

Yea.... How pissed did you get when them Dems did all this same shit to Bush and worse? They didn't send a letter to Iran INFORMING IRAN of how our constitution works, but that is all. Why didn't they send the letter though?
1. Bush wasn't negotiating with terrorist.
2. If he had been trying to broker a deal he wouldn't have been keepin everything secret, as he wouldn't be giving into everyone of their demands and getting nothing out of them like Obama.
3. He would most likely include congress. Possibly not.
4. Democrats do not know how the constitution works to be able to inform Iran of how it works.

Yet The Dems in congress treated Bush just as bad or worse, and the media treated Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Condoleeza all WAYYYY worse.


And that shitty president of yours now called Bush "Irresponsible and unpatriotic" for running up the debt and then he came in and ran up more debt. And Bush has REFUSES to insult Obama. He refuses to talk about what's going on or give his opinion as he doesn't want to make it harder for Obama.

1 Is classless
1 is not

[FSUKW]

you fuckers assume a lot. i would be pissed if the dems did it as well. and n o i do not get excited when the repukes charge of keep saying obama is breaking the law. only thing is the things obama has done the repukes have done as well as and more than twice as often. so spare me the holier than thou bullshit. how many billions have the repukes cost this country in shutdowns and stupid lawsuits? how many of the repuke golden boys used social security growing up only to try come up with a plan to do away with it now that they do not need it.

Yea.... How pissed did you get when them Dems did all this same shit to Bush and worse? They didn't send a letter to Iran INFORMING IRAN of how our constitution works, but that is all. Why didn't they send the letter though?
1. Bush wasn't negotiating with terrorist.
2. If he had been trying to broker a deal he wouldn't have been keepin everything secret, as he wouldn't be giving into everyone of their demands and getting nothing out of them like Obama.
3. He would most likely include congress. Possibly not.
4. Democrats do not know how the constitution works to be able to inform Iran of how it works.

Yet The Dems in congress treated Bush just as bad or worse, and the media treated Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Condoleeza all WAYYYY worse.


And that shitty president of yours now called Bush "Irresponsible and unpatriotic" for running up the debt and then he came in and ran up more debt. And Bush has REFUSES to insult Obama. He refuses to talk about what's going on or give his opinion as he doesn't want to make it harder for Obama.

1 Is classless
1 is not

As Aubie if he knows what this number represents

$18,005,549,328,561.45

[ericberry14]

you fuckers assume a lot. i would be pissed if the dems did it as well. and n o i do not get excited when the repukes charge of keep saying obama is breaking the law. only thing is the things obama has done the repukes have done as well as and more than twice as often. so spare me the holier than thou bullshit. how many billions have the repukes cost this country in shutdowns and stupid lawsuits? how many of the repuke golden boys used social security growing up only to try come up with a plan to do away with it now that they do not need it.

Yea.... How pissed did you get when them Dems did all this same shit to Bush and worse? They didn't send a letter to Iran INFORMING IRAN of how our constitution works, but that is all. Why didn't they send the letter though?
1. Bush wasn't negotiating with terrorist.
2. If he had been trying to broker a deal he wouldn't have been keepin everything secret, as he wouldn't be giving into everyone of their demands and getting nothing out of them like Obama.
3. He would most likely include congress. Possibly not.
4. Democrats do not know how the constitution works to be able to inform Iran of how it works.

Yet The Dems in congress treated Bush just as bad or worse, and the media treated Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Condoleeza all WAYYYY worse.


And that shitty president of yours now called Bush "Irresponsible and unpatriotic" for running up the debt and then he came in and ran up more debt. And Bush has REFUSES to insult Obama. He refuses to talk about what's going on or give his opinion as he doesn't want to make it harder for Obama.

1 Is classless
1 is not

As Aubie if he knows what this number represents

$18,005,549,328,561.45

obviously the least amount you'd have to spend to get a woman to sleep with his old, fat, retarded ass.

[Y4NK33 PL4N3T]

As Aubie if he knows what this number represents

$18,005,549,328,561.45

That's obviously the combined total of taxpayer money the unemployed trio GheyDee, Aubs & 20 have spent on iPhones, iPads, flat screens and weed over the last 5 years.

At least Aubs served in the military & 20 served Pizza Hut pizzas. :yes

That may also be the sum Ghettinaids08 & Erinfairy have spent on first dates on Tinder whores while simultaneously filing for bankruptcy. :up

[JdPat04]

no kw i do not. hell ask me yourself.

The debt

[FSUKW]

yes all those wars and tax breaks for the ultra rich put on a credit card and somehow its obama's fault. this country was fucked when bush left.

God damn, you are an idiot. I am seriously going to ignore your stupidity.

[FSUKW]

go fuck yourself before you do kw. i could care less if you read my stuff or not. you do not care about truth you care about appearances. you and jd have been nothing but asshats lately anyway. most of the good people have been runnoft or left over stupid bullshit. yall claim not to be racist but did very little to defend bink or some others running people off when bounce called him a nigger or idiots like eric berry did nigger this or nigger that. i hope you let your daughters date jameis since he is no threat to anyone. time to find a better board where supposed friends do not put people down because of their beliefs. the hole is not about what is right and what is wrong its about who thinks they won the argument with complete disreguard of the truth. do not bother answering anything cus i am gone and not coming back.

All you do is whine like a baby and make stupid assumptions and then get mad when NOBODY believes them.

I was responding to this in my last post.

" yes all those wars and tax breaks for the ultra rich put on a credit card and somehow its obama's fault. this country was fucked when bush left."

Obama has taken the National debt from 10 Trillion to 18 Trillion and somehow it is Bush's fault. That is dumb, plain and simple.

As for your Feguson theories, what about the black cops who shot unarmed white kids in both Alabama and Utah?

You are biased, hypocritical, whiney and ill prepared with the presentation of your argument. You then top it off with a barrage of complaining when called out. If you are unhappy, maybe you should leave. Maybe there is a board out there with posters who will actually buy your crap.

[FSUKW]

TO top it off, Obama said this when he was a Presidential Candidate:

Spicer noted that when Obama was a candidate in 2008, he attacked George W. Bush using the same sort of raw-dollar accounting, declaring that adding $4 trillion to the national debt was “irresponsible and “unpatriotic.”

Obama has added 8 Trillion and his presidency isn't even over.

Hypoocrite?????