Replies

Second, DHS seems to be saying that it was compelled to disclose whatever information it may have given to Mexico by the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which President Nixon ratified in 1969.
Actually that treaty was ratified by the duly elected US Senate in 1969 and not President Nixon.

Strike out there, already misleading.

Author should have said "ratified under President Nixon," but it is not "misleading" at all:

U.S. diplomats and those from 165 other nations signed the convention in April 1963, and President Richard Nixon sent it to the Senate, where it was finally and unanimously approved in 1969.

Does not affect the argument or the information in the NRO article one whit.

If you have a problem with the way that treaty is being follwed through, it is up to SCOTUS, not misleading hyperbole from a journalist.

Suggest you re-read the article. You have apparently not digested the analysis by National Review.

I am at this juncture agnostic on the story, but the NRO piece presents sober assessment and its major points deserve response, which you have not done.

Author should have said "ratified under President Nixon," but it is not "misleading" at all:

Actually it is since Mr. McCarthy left the impression that Presidents ratify treaties, which they do not per the US Constitution.

One would think that a "genius" at NRO would not use misleading grammar and know a basic function of the US Constitution.