Posted on 08/13/2015 3:31:40 PM PDT by Aspenhuskerette
Last week during the most-watched primary debate in history, a U.S. senator fired a cogently argued objection at his party’s leader, drawing a contemptuous and insulting personal attack.
No, it wasn’t Sen. Rand Paul, who chastised Donald Trump for being “on every side of every issue,” criticism for which Trump poked Paul for “having a bad night.”
It was Sen. Chuck Schumer who, after taking a month to Think Again about the Iranian nuclear agreement, announced his carefully considered rationale for opposing President Barack Obama’s controversial foreign-policy objective — an accord that reverses America’s long-standing policy to prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon and the proliferation it would spawn.
Schumer judged the deal not on “whether the agreement is ideal but whether we are better with or without it.” He concluded we’d be worse off and less able to thwart the world’s foremost sponsor of terrorism after giving Iran’s “brutal, theocratic” regime $50 billion to $150 billion in unfrozen assets to “pursue nefarious goals” and allowing them to become a nuclear-threshold state.
Schumer’s conclusion reflects the opinion of experts who’ve appeared before Congress, including Ambassador Robert Joseph, chief U.S. negotiator of the 2003 Libya deal that dismantled the country’s nuclear program.
Calling the Iran deal a “bad agreement” with “fatal flaws,” Joseph testified that “the threat to the U.S. homeland and to our NATO allies of an Iran armed with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles will increase, not decrease, under the anticipated agreement.”
Schumer cited the ayatollahs’ long track record of deceit and deception and their “tight and undiminished grip on Iran” in deciding it’s “better to keep U.S. sanctions in place, strengthen them, enforce secondary sanctions on other nations and pursue the hard-trodden path of diplomacy once more, difficult as it may be.”
Unwilling to tolerate principled opposition, deal supporters launched
(Excerpt) Read more at aspentimes.com ...
Chuck just wants to keep y his liberal Jewish backers happy
This is very unlike a typical lockstep liberal democrat. I reserve judgement on Schumer on this one. Definite smell of mendacity.
It is within the realm of possibility that Schumer’s opposition is principled and in the best interest of the country. I cannot dismiss that possibility.
“It is within the realm of possibility that Schumer’s opposition is principled and in the best interest of the country.”
Is there really a first time for everything?
Schumer’s announcement of opposition came only after enough Democratic support was assured to keep the plan intact.
Schumer is just trying to have it both ways: standing against the Iran nuclear deal while knowing full well it won’t make any difference.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/07/dont-be-fooled-by-chuck-schumers-opposition-to-the-iran-deal/
Heavy fire from the WH.
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.