The 47 Republicans did not only write to all the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran, they lied. That is where this letter falls into a category all by itself. Is this a citizen's letter conveniently using Congressional stationary or is this an actual function of the US Senate?
I think that is very important to decide about the brevity of THE ACT of writing this letter. This won't go away. It is part of history now. This letter has to be put into legal context and ACTED ON.
There has to be a determination as to whether this action by 47 US Republicans was more than simply a political mistake as some like to call it, or was it something more? I think it is something far more than most want to call it.
If this is a political stunt, then there is a violation of law that has occurred. Political rants on US Senate stationary? Really?
One of the reasons this letter will be causing the USA to lose esteem in an international theater is because it is a deception as well as a mistake.
The words state, "...under our Constitution, while the President negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratification...."
All International agreements are not ratified by the US Senate. That is a lie. It goes on from there...
In the case of a treaty the Senate must ratify it by two-thirds vote. That is true, however, all international agreements are not ratified by the US Senate, yet the signators of the letter puts this fact in regard to treaties immediately after a frank lie. It is an obvious contextual lie that is meant to leverage power over talks with Iran.
Then there is this verbiage about a Congressional-Executive Agreement.
What is a So-Called Congressional-Executive Agreement? Where does that come from in the US Constitution? There is no such thing. The branches of government are separate and autonomous and act as checks and balances to the power of the USA. What the heck is that? It doesn't exist.
Three fifths vote of the Senate? A treaty or any international document to pass through both the House and the Senate requires a three-fourth's vote. What is McConnell doing signing a document that is completely inaccurate? Was this some kind of joke? A joke on Senate stationary?
A filibuster needs a two-thirds majority and that is simply by the rules of the Senate. It has nothing to do with the US Constitution.
The only place a two-thirds majority is mandated is when passing an Amendment to the USA Constitution. Is Tom Cotton stating the Iranian document is going to be an amendment to the USA Constitution? What foreign authority is going to understand this letter and quite frankly is going to care about procedural issues of the USA Constitution?
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state (in this case, state means one of the thirteen original states), without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate
Then Cotton and the other 46 signators of the letter start this school room instruction of how the Senate is in office for six years and the President is 4 years. Huh? Why would Iran give a damn about that?
What Cotton and the rest of the signing Republicans go on to state is the talks of P5+1 doesn't matter a rat's ass.
Excuse me? There are five other countries involved in the talks with Iran. The talks take up time and money to be conducted. That time and money to all the countries involved, including Iran, is an investment in the future. THE FUTURE.
Tom Cotton and his signators have done something really terrible in addressing a foreign power without including what the definition of leadership means in regard to "Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran." Just any leader? The leader of the Iranian Girl Scouts will do?
This entire venture by 47 Republicans cannot and should not be swept under any carpet. It is a document on Senate stationary addressed to Leaders of a foreign power discussing a delicate issue that will create a balance or imbalance of power in the Middle East. This is not a minor issue.
P5 + 1 are acting on the enforcement of the UN Treaty on Non-Proliferation. The USA is a member of the UN, a signator to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the responsibility of the US Senate is over. OVER! The Executive Branch has the responsibility of carrying out the business of the country. That is what President Obama and Secretary Kerry is conducting. They are not asking pretty please to enforce the UN Treaty, they are taking on the responsibility of the USA in it's status as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council. There is absolutely no role for the US Senate in this matter. The ONLY role the legislature will have is if the President asks for sanctions by the USA as a unilateral action.
I also see no reason why President Obama or Secretary Kerry has to explain reality and/or how to interpret the US Constitution, the UN Charter or the Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no reason for the Executive Branch to be involved with the US Senate at all regarding the talks with Iran. When the President comes to the people with an agreement, then and only then can the USA decide about unilateral actions in addition to the UN agreement.
Got that!
The US Senate has already done it's work when it became a member to the UN and signator to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Given that reality, what the hell is the letter for except to use official stationary of the US Senate to leverage personal and party politics in an international venue?
It is the responsibility of the Senate Democrats to sort through the ramifications of this letter and bring ethical charges at the very least. Quite frankly, the 47 Republicans wrote a personal view of the world which excluded allies, the United Nations, the Non-Proliferation Treaty or any number of other countries on a Senate letterhead. This has to be litigated. There are serious issues here and there can be no precedent tolerated regarding any of their actions.
Today, because of this letter, the entire world is looking curiously at the USA wondering if they have to understand the US Constitution and it's interpretation to discern whether or not this is a coup government.
There is no excuse for Mr. Cotton and the others. They range in their expertise from months in the US Senate to decades. This is nonsense. A freshman Senator is the tail waging the dog and expects to get away with it?
This entire episode needs to be addressed through laws and protocols. It is my estimation this letter is a violation to the UN Non-proliferation Treaty as well as a violation in US laws and ethics.
I think that is very important to decide about the brevity of THE ACT of writing this letter. This won't go away. It is part of history now. This letter has to be put into legal context and ACTED ON.
There has to be a determination as to whether this action by 47 US Republicans was more than simply a political mistake as some like to call it, or was it something more? I think it is something far more than most want to call it.
If this is a political stunt, then there is a violation of law that has occurred. Political rants on US Senate stationary? Really?
One of the reasons this letter will be causing the USA to lose esteem in an international theater is because it is a deception as well as a mistake.
The words state, "...under our Constitution, while the President negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratification...."
All International agreements are not ratified by the US Senate. That is a lie. It goes on from there...
In the case of a treaty the Senate must ratify it by two-thirds vote. That is true, however, all international agreements are not ratified by the US Senate, yet the signators of the letter puts this fact in regard to treaties immediately after a frank lie. It is an obvious contextual lie that is meant to leverage power over talks with Iran.
Then there is this verbiage about a Congressional-Executive Agreement.
What is a So-Called Congressional-Executive Agreement? Where does that come from in the US Constitution? There is no such thing. The branches of government are separate and autonomous and act as checks and balances to the power of the USA. What the heck is that? It doesn't exist.
Three fifths vote of the Senate? A treaty or any international document to pass through both the House and the Senate requires a three-fourth's vote. What is McConnell doing signing a document that is completely inaccurate? Was this some kind of joke? A joke on Senate stationary?
A filibuster needs a two-thirds majority and that is simply by the rules of the Senate. It has nothing to do with the US Constitution.
The only place a two-thirds majority is mandated is when passing an Amendment to the USA Constitution. Is Tom Cotton stating the Iranian document is going to be an amendment to the USA Constitution? What foreign authority is going to understand this letter and quite frankly is going to care about procedural issues of the USA Constitution?
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state (in this case, state means one of the thirteen original states), without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate
Then Cotton and the other 46 signators of the letter start this school room instruction of how the Senate is in office for six years and the President is 4 years. Huh? Why would Iran give a damn about that?
What Cotton and the rest of the signing Republicans go on to state is the talks of P5+1 doesn't matter a rat's ass.
Excuse me? There are five other countries involved in the talks with Iran. The talks take up time and money to be conducted. That time and money to all the countries involved, including Iran, is an investment in the future. THE FUTURE.
Tom Cotton and his signators have done something really terrible in addressing a foreign power without including what the definition of leadership means in regard to "Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran." Just any leader? The leader of the Iranian Girl Scouts will do?
This entire venture by 47 Republicans cannot and should not be swept under any carpet. It is a document on Senate stationary addressed to Leaders of a foreign power discussing a delicate issue that will create a balance or imbalance of power in the Middle East. This is not a minor issue.
P5 + 1 are acting on the enforcement of the UN Treaty on Non-Proliferation. The USA is a member of the UN, a signator to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, the responsibility of the US Senate is over. OVER! The Executive Branch has the responsibility of carrying out the business of the country. That is what President Obama and Secretary Kerry is conducting. They are not asking pretty please to enforce the UN Treaty, they are taking on the responsibility of the USA in it's status as a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council. There is absolutely no role for the US Senate in this matter. The ONLY role the legislature will have is if the President asks for sanctions by the USA as a unilateral action.
I also see no reason why President Obama or Secretary Kerry has to explain reality and/or how to interpret the US Constitution, the UN Charter or the Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is no reason for the Executive Branch to be involved with the US Senate at all regarding the talks with Iran. When the President comes to the people with an agreement, then and only then can the USA decide about unilateral actions in addition to the UN agreement.
Got that!
The US Senate has already done it's work when it became a member to the UN and signator to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Given that reality, what the hell is the letter for except to use official stationary of the US Senate to leverage personal and party politics in an international venue?
It is the responsibility of the Senate Democrats to sort through the ramifications of this letter and bring ethical charges at the very least. Quite frankly, the 47 Republicans wrote a personal view of the world which excluded allies, the United Nations, the Non-Proliferation Treaty or any number of other countries on a Senate letterhead. This has to be litigated. There are serious issues here and there can be no precedent tolerated regarding any of their actions.
Today, because of this letter, the entire world is looking curiously at the USA wondering if they have to understand the US Constitution and it's interpretation to discern whether or not this is a coup government.
There is no excuse for Mr. Cotton and the others. They range in their expertise from months in the US Senate to decades. This is nonsense. A freshman Senator is the tail waging the dog and expects to get away with it?
This entire episode needs to be addressed through laws and protocols. It is my estimation this letter is a violation to the UN Non-proliferation Treaty as well as a violation in US laws and ethics.
