A group of 47 senators sent an open-letter to the leaders of Iran reminding them that treaties that are negotiated by the President have to be approved by Congress. This is in fact how the Constitution works.
The Democrats are furious that anyone is questioning their self-confessed “bad deal” with Iran.
Breitbart News explains:
President Obama set his Vice Presidential attack dog on the forty-seven GOP senators who dared send their March 9th letter to Iran’s leadership warning them any deal signed with Team Obama may be short-lived when a new president comes to office.
But Biden, like his boss, fails to do his homework before making outlandish statements or else chooses conveniently to overlook the facts.
Livid over the GOP letter, Biden proclaimed: “In thirty-six years in the United States Senate, I cannot recall another instance in which Senators wrote directly to advise another country.”
Directing his venom at the Senate’s Republican majority, Biden claimed the GOP letter was “expressly designed to undercut a sitting President in the midst of sensitive international negotiations…(an act) beneath the dignity of an institution I revere.”
Well, how about it? Has any other senator undermined diplomatic efforts by a President?
Well, yes – Obama himself, when he was a senator:
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.
The plain truth is that Obama wants a nuclear Iran. That’s what this deal is about – undermining U.N. sanctions against Iran, and removing U.S. sanctions against Iran.
The leftist Washington Post explains:
We surmised yesterday that the Obama administration had the idea to go to the United Nations to pass by resolution what Congress would never agree to: a lifting of sanctions on Iran in exchange for a nearly worthless deal in which Iran would keep thousands of centrifuges and get a 10-year glide path to nuclear breakout.
[…]For quite some time, former U.N. spokesman Richard Grenell has been warning that this is exactly what is coming down the pike. Last year Grenell wrote: “President Obama’s Geneva proposal to the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council allowing Iran to enrich some uranium violates previous UN resolutions demanding the Islamic Republic stop ‘all’ uranium enrichment activity. To avoid a violation of current UN resolutions, the permanent members must ask the entire Security Council to vote to weaken and supersede their previous demands.” He continued, “The UN’s four rounds of hard-fought sanctions on Iran and several other resolutions demanding compliance call for a full suspension of all enrichment activities, including research and development, then full verification of that suspension before negotiations on a permanent diplomatic solution begin. The sequencing was strategic. It was designed to build international confidence in a secretive country’s deceitful past.” But Obama deliberately departed from these restrictions, so he has always planned to go back. Otherwise, his deal would be in violation of existing international law.
That brings us to U.S. law. The U.N. resolutions don’t automatically become law, the administration was forced to concede. But under currentU.S. sanctions law, the president can waive them. And that is just what Obama intends to do. He will get the U.N. to water down international sanctions while he suspends U.S. sanctions.
Obama’s legacy becomes demolition of the sanctions regime and an opening for Iran to either make a dash for breakout or to wait 10 years and get its stamped permission slip. The word for this is “containment.” The next president can reverse the waiver, but the Iranian economy will be on the road to recovery and the next president’s options will be severely limited. Iran might even have a bomb by then.
So Obama is trying to undo U.N. sanctions against Iran, drop U.S. sanctions against Iran – for what? What is the purpose of helping Iran to develop nuclear weapons? Why would anyone interested in world peace want to do that?
Why dont we just leave the middle east? I have been hearing and watching news stories about us being iraq since my 6th grade year, im 23 going on 24 and americans soldiers are still there. We didnt find weapons os mass destruction e,it took forever to find osama bin laden, we dealt with al quada and now isis. Why are we over there? When america has trouble i dont see other countries sending their troops, so why must we send ours? Majority of americans due to 9/11 have strong racist & prejudice views of people of middle eastern descent. Majority of americas are christians while the middle east major religion is islam – i dont see anyone at this point we are making any kind of difference; it just seems to be getting worse.
LikeLike