Skip to comments.Senate passes support of 2nd Amendment and to keep us out of the UN Arms Trade Treaty bill.
Posted on 03/23/2013 4:02:03 AM PDT by Hillarys Gate Cult
S.Amdt. 139 to S.Con.Res. 8
To uphold Second Amendment rights and prevent the United States from entering into the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty.
YEAs 53 NAYs 46 Not Voting 1
Let’s see - a vote to stay with the Constitution. That’s nice.
The downside was a 53-46 vote.
That's way too close for comfort.
It means that 46 of those sorry mother-lovers want to give your sovereignty away to the United Nations. That number may grow. That is the downside.
Downside was not the best word for it. What I’m asking is if the left already has an end run in place around the bill even before it was voted on.
The left is always plotting and scheming but a 2/3 yes vote on this one is not very likely.
NAYs -—46 All the Usual Ones... Here they are, Tea Party; Let’s fire them..
Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH)
Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cowan (D-MA)
Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY)
Harkin (D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN)
Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL)
Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA)Warren (D-MA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)Wyden (D-OR)
Not Voting - 1
This also chilled me to the bone.
46 people who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States are willing to hand over sovereignty.
46 people have made it clear that they are enemies of the United States.
US Senate Votes
Violating Oath of Office is a Federal Crime
(what for and why they voted)
Statement of Purpose: To uphold Second Amendment rights and. (forget anything after and.)
Vote Counts: YEAs 53 NAYs 46
Not Voting 1
Alphabetical by Violating Senator Name
Baldwin (D-WI), Nay
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bennet (D-CO), Nay
Blumenthal (D-CT), Nay
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Cantwell (D-WA), Nay
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Coons (D-DE), Nay
Cowan (D-MA), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Franken (D-MN), Nay
Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay
Hirono (D-HI), Nay
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kaine (D-VA), Nay
King (I-ME), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Merkley (D-OR), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murphy (D-CT), Nay
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schatz (D-HI), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Shaheen (D-NH), Nay
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Udall (D-CO), Nay
Udall (D-NM), Nay
Warner (D-VA), Nay
Warren (D-MA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office members of Congress are required to take before assuming office. 5 U.S.C. 3333 requires members of Congress sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law, 5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense (and a violation of oath of office) for anyone employed in the United States Government (including members of Congress) to advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government. The fourth federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
The definition of advocate is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. One provision of Executive Order 10450 specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate the alteration ... of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means. Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. It can only be altered by constitutional amendment. Thus, according to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331which alters the form of government other by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.
Fine, Fire, then lock their A$S up..
Exactly. When was it ruled upon that a so-called treaty could be approved that usurped our sovereign and Constitutional rights?
This concept of multi-nationalism is being pushed by globalists and multi-national corporations and neocons because national sovereignty is more than an annoyance to those who see national borders as an annoyance and impediment to their agenda.
And what are we doing about it?
(It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
It's time to quit watering the Tree of Tyranny. If we won't even do that, we sure won't do anything really strenuous.
“...I) Reid (D-NV) R...”
Attention NRA! This is not a 2A supporter but a wolf is sheep’s clothes. Shout it out LaPierre!
Vienna Convention on Treaties.
signed by US in 1970.
The downside is that this “vote” is meaningless. It is theater, designed to give dems up for reelection some cover against attacks on their anti-2nd-amendment views. this is an amendment to the senate budget proposal that will NEVER be signed into law.
There is a process on changing our constitution.
The rest of the process seems to be missing.
Glad to see my CO participants voting the party line way, especially so soon after Chickenpooper signed the 2nd Amendment rights of Coloradoan patriots away this past Wednesday. I’m really starting to despise that entire side of the aisle.
Yes. A treaty can be legally ratified with 34 votes out of a quorum of 51 Senators.
Try parsing the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution without any "wishful thinking" blinders and you'll note that first comma before the phrase, "under the authority of the United States." It's a problem.
We have treaties on the books that wildly exceed the enumerated powers of the Constitution yet not one has ever been thrown out.