Posted on 09/09/2015 5:27:42 AM PDT by Dave346
Rally organizer Jenny Beth Martin said yesterday over 70 people requested to speak at today's rally on the West Lawn of the Capitol. 38 speakers are currently listed including:
Presidential candidates Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Jim Gilmore
Sarah Palin, Mark Levin, Glenn Beck
Several Congressmen and national security experts.
Live stream available at link below the list of speakers.
(Excerpt) Read more at teapartypatriots.org ...
Question & Answer of the day!!! Where are Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and Bob Corker....nowhere to found!!! Shucks....I found them....they are bowing before the American “traitor” POTUS, Barack Hussein Obama!!! Pubbies....get real and dump these bozos!!!
GO TED CRUZ GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry, this is my first ping list. I pinged people to this event because it’s a link to the live stream. Going forward the ping list will be less frequent and only reserved for breaking news and a daily roundup of stories. Again, my apologies if it got spammy.
me too!!
Reminder to self: get my Ted Cruz Bumper Sticker....
not to worry..... Corker sent out an e mail
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3334269/posts?page=1#1
On Levin’s show yesterday I heard two folks driving there, One from Illinois, and one from Alabama... Interesting to see the turnout. The axis of 41 weasels inside the Senate chamber... Can they hear the noise coming from the outside?
Back to my question on another thread: What is Beck doing there? He hates Trump and talks him down every time he mentions him. Beck & Huckabee ought to get together and do a revival complete with tent.
I wouldn't mind seeing Cruz....not interested in the bloviating from other sources.
Maybe Ted will come back around here before the election. I'll probably go to see him.
If you listen (don’t look) to Trump in this venue, you will warm just a little to his leadership, methinks.
Whether it is an executive agreement or a treaty, it requires illegality to perform and should, therefore, be utterly rejected. If the Senate does not reject it, Mr. Trump, our next President apparent, must declare it void and of no effect.
To his credit, Trump honors contracts, rightly sees a treaty as a contract, and says he will not simply breach the treaty because it is a bad deal, but if it is confirmed by the Senate he will look for holes in it.
Well, Mr. Trump, there appears to be a big gaping hole in this treaty (or executive agreement). There is such a thing as contracts that are void, of no effect, and unenforceable. A contract in which the performance would break the law is such a contract. The U.S. Constitution and laws forbid treason as illegal. The U.S. Constitution defines treason as including “adhering to [U.S.] enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” (Art III, Sec 3, Cl 1). This treaty appears to require illegality becasue it looks to be an agreement whereby the U.S. is adhering to and aiding Iran, an avowed enemy of the U.S. in its nuclear development.
Note to Trump: A treaty (or executive agreement) that requires treason to perform is illegal and void. You have no duty, nor should you, enforce such a treaty because it amounts to an unenforceable contract. It would be rather your duty as President to declare such treaty void and of no effect.
Wonder if Beck will quit crying long enough to actually give a speech.
I turn Beck’s channel on when Dana Loesch is on. Can’t stand listening to Mr. self-righteous Beck and his constantly lecturing his viewers on how Americans don’t know their history and how the end of the world is at hand, so you better stock up on his Morman Survival Kit. Wonder how long he’ll be in his speech before he starts crying?
Amended previous post...
Whether it is an executive agreement or a treaty, it requires illegality to perform and should, therefore, be utterly rejected. If the Senate does not reject it, Mr. Trump, our next President apparent, must declare it void and of no effect.
To his credit, Trump honors contracts, rightly sees this agreement as a contract, and says he will not simply breach the agreement because it is a bad deal, but if it is confirmed by the Senate he will look for holes in it.
Well, Mr. Trump, there appears to be a big gaping hole in this agreement. There is such a thing as contracts that are void, of no effect, and unenforceable. A contract in which the performance would break the law is such a contract. The U.S. Constitution and laws forbid treason as illegal.
The U.S. Constitution defines treason as including “adhering to [U.S.] enemies, giving them aid and comfort.” (Art III, Sec 3, Cl 1). This outrageous agreement appears to require illegality because it looks to be an agreement whereby the U.S. is adhering to and aiding Iran an avowed enemy of the U.S. by allowing its nuclear development and helping them by giving them $150 billion.
Note to Trump: An executive agreement or treaty that requires treason to perform is illegal and void. You have no duty, nor should you, enforce such an agreement because it amounts to an unenforceable contract. It would be rather your duty as President to declare such an agreement void and of no effect.
The illegality of treason should be the argument used to persuade the Senate to reject this agreement. If the Senate fails, then as I said, Trump as President should have no problem repudiating this agreement as treasonous, illegal, and unenforceable.
Sure, I’m looking forward to it too!
SOTC, with all respect to you, friend, he's a liberal, and there's going to be no warming toward him on my part. At all.
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.