Posted on 05/09/2015 7:16:36 AM PDT by Olog-hai
As the June 30 deadline for a nuclear agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran approaches and the passage of a U.S. Senate bill that does not require the deal to be viewed as a treaty by Congress, the Center for Security Policy’s (CSP) President Frank Gaffney warned of the consequences of this scenario.
“We are dealing with national security fraud on the part of the Obama administration and its apologists or champions with regard to this agreement,” Gaffney said at a panel discussion hosted by the CSP on Friday in Washington, D.C. “It will not prevent Iran from getting the bomb, period.” […]
It is a mistake that the Senate legislation does not treat the agreement with Iran as a treaty, Gaffney said.
“It actually seems to eviscerate one of the Senate’s constitutional responsibilities, namely to advise and consent to treaties,” Gaffney said. “Anything of this import must be a treaty and must be considered as such. It is absolutely imperative that this deal be blocked.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
On the part of the RINOs as well.
“National Security Fraud”
How is that different from treason?
It’s not a mistake. Reelecting Mitch was a mistake.
Obama is a national security fraud.
Kind of like "You'll be able to keep your doctor, period."?
In answer to your question: Yes.
(You could help them use it.)
Imagine Alison Lundergan-Grimes in his place?
Bevin ought to have been written in. But it appears Kentucky is a blue state in a de facto sense.
The primary beneficiary of this Iran deal will be Pakistan who will be selling their nukes to the Saudis,Turkey Quatar,or any Sunni nation with the money to counter the Iranian nukes President Obama is facilitating by immediately releasing 30 to 50 billion bucks to the Iranians we were witholding under the sanctions to accelerate their program. Obama has unleashed the dream scenario for folks who want full proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the middle east.
McConnell graham McCain —this type, and I mean in the literal biblical sense- they get into their positions in a supra elective manner. It is an art they run as GOP like hill and BO run as Dems
And they don’t want the majority. They’re mot in there to represent us Certainly not to work for us.
It’s amazing to watch them destroy, though
Also amazing that ann coulter promoted McConnell just last year. The GOP in majority in the senate is a trifecta for BO power. He has no opposition not even the pretend one that these GOP ers put up while in minority
How did people like ann c not know this?
NO.....were dealing with our own BENEDICT ARNOLD....A TRAITOR plain and simple
aiding and abetting the enemy...
Iran has clearly stated their intention to USE THE NUKE AS SOON AS THEY GET IT...
Obama never gets involved in anything that helps the US
Can we convict an illegal alien of treason?
The problem arose out of the GOP winning the senate, and Mitch, as majority leader, announced that he would move Kirk-Menendez forward.
Kirk-Menendez began in Dec of 2013 and was debated a few months into 2014, before it died.
Kirk-Menendez was probably pertinent back then(2013-2014), but by Jan of 2015 it was irrelevant because the end of negotiations were close at hand.
So the general consensus was that Mitch was politicizing the issue, which scared off several dem allies.
Then the small group of senators traveled to Israel to meet with Mossad, who also opposed Kirk-Menendez, which prompted McCain, Graham, and Angus Winn to drop their support for Kirk-Menendez, and fall in behind Corker's bill. Then the Brit Prime Minister came out against Kirk Menendez, but McConnell kept pushing it, undoubtedly for political reasons.
Then, after Corker's bill had replaced Kirk-Menendez, Mitch allowed amendments to be thrown up only for political reasons.
If the GOP continues to try to politicize it(after negotiations are over), it will fail.
What are you talking about?
A sequence of events that began in 2013 that played out and the latest event is passage of the Corker legislation, and subsequent events will occur, and these subsequent events will be determined by the final language of the negotiations.
But some, are not cognizant of the sequence, and see everything as a stand alone event, and end up confused as to why or what happened. They are left in lurch, talking about treaties.
That doesn’t explain a thing any more than your previous post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
