On offer: 47 GOP Senatorial Traitors

[mpohl 1]

I would gladly trade the 47 GOP Senatorial Traitors to Iran in exchange for Javad Zarif. Unfortunately, I don't think there will be any takers.

We are stuck with this hazardous waste!


"Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has published an official response to the Republican letter to Iran's leaders, signed by 47 Senators, warning that Congress or a future president might overturn a nuclear deal if they dislike the terms. (You can read the full text of the letter, organized by Sen. Tom Cotton, here.)

Zarif's response is presented as an official government statement, so it's written in an awkward third-person, but Zarif still fires off some zingers. Here is the full text, with the most notable lines bolded (the main points are summed up below):

Asked about the open letter of 47 US Senators to Iranian leaders, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif, responded that "in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.

Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.

Foreign Minister Zarif added that "I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.

The Iranian Foreign Minister added that "change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Irans peaceful nuclear program." He continued "I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law."

He emphasized that if the current negotiation with P5+1 result in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.

Zarif expressed the hope that his comments "may enrich the knowledge of the authors to recognize that according to international law, Congress may not modify the terms of the agreement at any time as they claim, and if Congress adopts any measure to impede its implementation, it will have committed a material breach of US obligations.

The Foreign Minister also informed the authors that majority of US international agreements in recent decades are in fact what the signatories describe as "mere executive agreements" and not treaties ratified by the Senate.

He reminded them that "their letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments.

Zarif concluded by stating that "the Islamic Republic of Iran has entered these negotiations in good faith and with the political will to reach an agreement, and it is imperative for our counterparts to prove similar good faith and political will in order to make an agreement possible."

[rushmc 18]

the Hazardous waste is Biden/Obama...

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[mpohl 1]

The GOP stoops to a new low-insulting the intelligence of a hostile but not unwise group of Mullahs. A flawed textbook on US foreign policy isn't something the boys in Teheran needed. And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

The Republican descent into madness continues!

rushmc

the Hazardous waste is Biden/Obama...

[rushmc 18]

mpohl

The GOP stoops to a new low-insulting the intelligence of a hostile but not unwise group of Mullahs. A flawed textbook on US foreign policy isn't something the boys in Teheran needed. And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

The Republican descent into madness continues!

***the Hazardous waste is Biden/Obama...

the senate has to approve
Live with it

the only madness I see is the post above mine

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 212]

I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.

Those are pretty serious charges.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[mpohl 1]

Logan Act, which prohibits American citizens from communicating with foreign governments to conduct their own foreign policy.

turtlespeed

I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.

Those are pretty serious charges.

[turtlespeed 212]

mpohl

Logan Act, which prohibits American citizens from communicating with foreign governments to conduct their own foreign policy.

***I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.

Those are pretty serious charges.

That is an individual not a senate group or committee.

And then, so what do you say about Jimmy carter and his solo efforts in the past?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[regulator 0]

You do realize that if your goal was acheived and the entire US of A was liberal we would be carpet bombed into extinction in the first week. As they ran away with their hair on fire you could hear them say things like....'well at least we got gay marriage rights and obamacare passed first!!!'

[aphid 0]

mpohl

"Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif has published an official response to the Republican letter to Iran's leaders, signed by 47 Senators, warning that Congress...

... it's written in an awkward third-person, but Zarif still fires off some zingers."

Can Iran be trusted? Would they negotiate and honour an agreement in good faith? IMO, not for a heartbeat.

That said, I thought the Iranian response was nicely put. It echoes similar sentiments from other nations that have felt the sting of malleable US foreign policy.

Apparently though, rather than discuss the salient points that the Iranian composer raised, some would rather just throw mud at the OP, or quibble about his use of the descriptor "traitor".

That's unfortunate.

[lawrocket 3]

mpohl

Logan Act, which prohibits American citizens from communicating with foreign governments to conduct their own foreign policy.

***I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.

Those are pretty serious charges.

Unless that citizen is also a legislator who is acting in that capacity.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Boomerdog 0]

Years ago, I tried explaining the US Constitution to some colleagues from New Zealand. I enjoyed my time working with them, drinking beer; in fact one too many beers on occasion with them (NOTE: Constitution not discussed while drinking beer). They didn't get it. But then, I probably didn't understand a few things about how New Zealand's government works either.

The President HAS ALREADY STATED quite plainly he will not seek the advise and consent of the Senate in trying to get a deal with Iran on their nuclear program. Obama seeks an executive agreement. If an agreement is made, that agreement will be in force while Obama is in office simply because Obama can and will enforce it. Once Obama leaves office, the succeeding President and Congress is under NO LEGAL obligation to honor that agreement. The next President and Congress might honor the agreement for political reasons but that is a different matter altogether. Obama will not seek a treaty with Iran simply because he knows he will not get Senate ratification for the treaty under Article 2, Section 2, paragraph 2 of the U.S. Constitution which reads:

"He (the President) shall have Power, by and with the Advise and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur..."

Once a treaty is ratified, it carries the force of law. That's how we do business here in the US. You live outside the US? Fine, your country has its laws and I would thank you to remember that. You don't like the way we do business here amigo? Tough noogies!

Senator Cotton only reminded both the President and the Iranian dirtbags. Yeah, the letter was designed to "stick it" to both sides but that's American politics and like I said, if you don't like it...! Be that as it may, agree or disagree, the United States Senate is not out of bounds on this one.

[mpohl 1]

TREASON FOR TREASURE

Republicans in Congress fear that a deal with Iran will mean sanctions on Iran will be lifted. Lifting sanctions means that Iranian oil will come back into the market; and oil prices will go down further. Low oil prices mean weak profits for domestic oil producers and the oil giants.

Keeping Iraqi oil off the market with a war, started over fabricated accusations and ensuing hysteria, got the price of a barrel of oil up to $150 per barrel. Big oil cleaned up.

Big oil will not let peace get in the way of profit maximization; political tension always provides a bump to the price of oil called a risk premium. You'll see Congressional support for positions that drive the price of oil to higher levels coming from areas that reap the benefits of the higher prices and from Congressional members who receive the most support from big oil.

I call the strategy "Treason for Treasure".

[mpohl 1]

Perhaps relations with the Middle East are at an all time low,because of the condescending attitudes of Americans like Senator Cotton who thinks it is his responsibility to teach American civics to unworldly, uneducated Iranian negotiators.

Perhaps Senator Cotton should use the same energy he is using to stymie the negotiations to give a civics tutorial to high school students in Arkansas. Start by teaching them who the Secratary of State is and then proceed from there.

How many of your high school age constituents can even name their state senators? My guess is that the average Iranian student knows as much or more than the average Arkansas student about how a bill is passed in Congress.

Your letter is proof that most of your constituents are really not to bright if you were their choice for Senator.

regulator

You do realize that if your goal was acheived and the entire US of A was liberal we would be carpet bombed into extinction in the first week. As they ran away with their hair on fire you could hear them say things like....'well at least we got gay marriage rights and obamacare passed first!!!'

[mpohl 1]

A Legislator is a citizen.
And they were not acting in any official function.

Anyways, I am sure somebody at the DOJ/DOS is looking into this with more expertise than we have.

lawrocket

***
Logan Act, which prohibits American citizens from communicating with foreign governments to conduct their own foreign policy.

***I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.

Those are pretty serious charges.

Unless that citizen is also a legislator who is acting in that capacity.

[Anvilbrother 0]

#1 in the nation, lets see how this first weekend of SEC play goes. I am interested in seeing how the freshman really handle the pressure on the mound, and if SS can step up and lead. He has had a confidence issue in the past, and once he finally makes a few plays, you can see it in his face, he really perks up and the rest of the team feeds off that energy. Go local sports team!

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[lawrocket 3]

mpohl

A Legislator is a citizen.

So is the President.

Quote

And they were not acting in any official function.

So it was merely a coincidence that all 47 are Senators?

Quote

Anyways, I am sure somebody at the DOJ/DOS is looking into this with more expertise than we have.

They've looked at it in the past. Note the history of Congressional junkets off to meet with foreign leaders. Jim Wright buddy buddy with Daniel Ortega. The Logan Act doesn't cover this stuff.

Now, id you want to talk Constitution, Article 1 does not have a power to host foreign ambassadors. That's the President alone. I think it was arguably Unconstitutional for Congress to host Netanyahu's speech. To me that's bad, But not treason, any more than Obama's various Unconstitutional promises. Two wrongs don't make a right. So try three.

See ya separation of powers. And toodles to checks and balances.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[mpohl 1]

Bro'. You really need to stay on schedule with your medications!

Otherwise you know what will happen: blue Unicorns will hunt you, and the neighbor's sunflowers will sing to you.

Anvilbrother

#1 in the nation, lets see how this first weekend of SEC play goes. I am interested in seeing how the freshman really handle the pressure on the mound, and if SS can step up and lead. He has had a confidence issue in the past, and once he finally makes a few plays, you can see it in his face, he really perks up and the rest of the team feeds off that energy. Go local sports team!

[Anvilbrother 0]

I think the new ball is good so far, we have not seen anyone hit because the ball was going so fast that they could not react to it as they all feared. It seems to be traveling about 30 feet further when hit, and is causing less blisters for the pitchers. What do you think?

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[airdvr 200]

mpohl

And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

Jeebus! I hope a freshman senator doesn't get elected as POTUS. We would be in a world of hurt if that ever happened.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Andy9o8 0]

airdvr

***
And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

Jeebus! I hope a freshman senator doesn't get elected as POTUS. We would be in a world of hurt if that ever happened.

You do know the meaning of "freshman", don't you?

[airdvr 200]

Andy9o8

******
And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

Jeebus! I hope a freshman senator doesn't get elected as POTUS. We would be in a world of hurt if that ever happened.

You do know the meaning of "freshman", don't you?

The United States Senate career of Barack Obama began on January 4, 2005 and ended on November 16, 2008. How many 6 year terms do you think he served in those 4 years? You and I have a different view of the term Freshman.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[Driver1 0]

airdvr

*********
And a Freshman senator lead the charge. What's next?

Jeebus! I hope a freshman senator doesn't get elected as POTUS. We would be in a world of hurt if that ever happened.

You do know the meaning of "freshman", don't you?

The United States Senate career of Barack Obama began on January 4, 2005 and ended on November 16, 2008. How many 6 year terms do you think he served in those 4 years? You and I have a different view of the term Freshman.

BAM!

There will be no addressing the customers as "Bitches", "Morons" or "Retards"!

[billvon 2,454]

>I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What
>evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.


===========
Aid and Comfort

To render assistance or counsel. Any act that deliberately strengthens or tends to strengthen enemies of the United States, or that weakens or tends to weaken the power of the United States to resist and attack such enemies is characterized as aid and comfort.

Article 3, section 3, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution specifies that the giving of aid and comfort to the enemy is an element in the crime of Treason. Aid and comfort may consist of substantial assistance or the mere attempt to provide some support; actual help or the success of the enterprise is not relevant.
===========

[lawrocket 3]

billvon

>I see no justification whatsoever of any of the senators being traitors. What
>evidence do you have that you can seriously make this claim.


===========
Aid and Comfort

To render assistance or counsel. Any act that deliberately strengthens or tends to strengthen enemies of the United States, or that weakens or tends to weaken the power of the United States to resist and attack such enemies is characterized as aid and comfort.

Article 3, section 3, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution specifies that the giving of aid and comfort to the enemy is an element in the crime of Treason. Aid and comfort may consist of substantial assistance or the mere attempt to provide some support; actual help or the success of the enterprise is not relevant.
===========

SO who was given aid and comfort? DOesn't sound like Iran was too happy about it. Was Israel given aid and comfort? Strengthened against the US?

Sounds odd. I think that it's straight up unconstitutional. To suggest more than that is overplaying the hand.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rushmc 18]

Make sure you save enough rope to hang these Democrates right along side those you post about

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/10/7-times-democrats-advised-americas-enemies-to-oppose-the-president/

Quote

Senators John Sparkman (D-AL) and George McGovern (D-SD). The two Senators visited Cuba and met with government actors there in 1975. They said that they did not act on behalf of the United States, so the State Department ignored their activity.

Senator Teddy Kennedy (D-MA). In 1983, Teddy Kennedy sent emissaries to the Soviets to undermine Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy. According to a memo finally released in 1991 from head of the KGB Victor Chebrikov to then-Soviet leader Yuri Andropov:


On 9-10 May of this year, Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow. The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.

What was the message? That Teddy would help stifle Reagan’s anti-Soviet foreign policy if the Soviets would help Teddy run against Reagan in 1984. Kennedy offered to visit Moscow to “arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Then he said that he would set up interviews with Andropov in the United States. “Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews…Like other rational people, [Kennedy] is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations,” the letter explained. The memo concluded:


Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988. Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president.

House Speaker Jim Wright (D-TX). In 1984, 10 Democrats sent a letter to Daniel Ortega Saavedra, the head of the military dictatorship in Nicaragua, praising Saavedra for “taking steps to open up the political process in your country.” House Speaker Jim Wright signed the letter.

In 1987, Wright worked out a deal to bring Ortega to the United States to visit with lawmakers. As The New York Times reported:


There were times when the White House seemed left out of the peace process, uninformed, irritated. ”We don’t have any idea what’s going on,” an Administration official said Thursday. And there was a bizarre atmosphere to the motion and commotion: the leftist Mr. Ortega, one of President Reagan’s arch enemies, heads a Government that the Administration has been trying to overthrow by helping to finance a war that has killed thousands of Nicaraguans on both sides. Yet he was freely moving around Washington, visiting Mr. Wright in his Capitol Hill office, arguing his case in Congress and at heavily covered televised news conferences. He criticized President Reagan; he recalled that the United States, whose troops intervened in Nicaragua several times between 1909 and 1933, had supported the Somoza family dictatorship which lasted for 43 years until the Sandinistas overthrew it in 1979.

Ortega then sat next to Wright as he presented a “detailed cease-fire proposal.” The New York Times said, “Mr. Ortega seemed delighted to turn to Mr. Wright.”

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. The Christian Science Monitor reported that the two senators “brought back word that Mr. Ortega would be willing to accept a cease-fire if Congress rejected aid to the rebels…That week the House initially voted down aid to the contras, and Mr. Ortega made an immediate trip to Moscow.” Kerry then shilled on behalf of the Ortega government:


We are still trying to overthrow the politics of another country in contravention of international law, against the Organization of American States charter. We negotiated with North Vietnam. Why can we not negotiate with a country smaller than North Carolina and with half the population of Massachusetts? It’s beyond me. And the reason is that they just want to get rid of them [the Sandinistas], they want to throw them out, they don’t want to talk to them.

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. There, McDermott laid the groundwork for the Democratic Party’s later rip on President George W. Bush, stating, “the president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war.” McDermott, along with his colleagues, suggested that the American administration give the Iraqi regime “due process” and “take the Iraqis on their face value.” Bonior said openly he was acting on behalf of the government:


The purpose of our trip was to make it very clear, as I said in my opening statement, to the officials in Iraq how serious we–the United States is about going to war and that they will have war unless these inspections are allowed to go unconditionally and unfettered and open. And that was our point. And that was in the best interest of not only Iraq, but the American citizens and our troops. And that’s what we were emphasizing. That was our primary concern–that and looking at the humanitarian situation.

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.” That would have given Saddam Hussein fourteen months in which to prepare for war.

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.” Pelosi was accompanied by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA), Tom Lantos (D-CA), Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), Nick J. Rahall II (D-WV), and Keith Ellison (D-MN). Zaid Haider, Damascus bureau chief for Al Safir, reportedly said, ‘There is a feeling now that change is going on in American policy – even if it’s being led by the opposition.”

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln