[Menehune56]

Now, he said, the ball is in the court of Democratic lawmakers who have to decide whether to support their president as he seeks to secure Congressional approval, or to join the vocal Republican opposition to an agreement.

Is this another of Mitch McConnell's bass-ackwards deals where it will take a 2/3 senate vote to dump the agreement instead of ratify it?

[nitzy]

If I recall correctly, it is.

[C19fan]

Yes. This is the kabuki theater. The Corker bill means unless Congress passes a law and Obama signs the bill disapproving the Iranian agreement the deal is de facto binding. Congress sees the agreement and will vote on a law disapproving the agreement. Both houses approve the resolution disapproving the agreement. Obama vetoes this bill. Enough Democrats will not vote to override the Obama veto therefore the Iranian agreement sticks and Obama can lift sanctions, etc.

[Mariner]

"Is this another of Mitch McConnell's bass-ackwards deals where it will take a 2/3 senate vote to dump the agreement instead of ratify it? "

Why, yes it is.

If on first try POTUS does no get a simple majority in House and Senate, upon his veto of PREVIOUS Enabling Legislation (Corker Bill), it would require only 34 Democrat Senators and 144 Democrat House Members to make it the law of the land.

It's a crime against the Republic and all involved should be tried and hung on the Capitol steps.

Including (among MANY), Ted Cruz.