BASS BARN banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,016 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
.

If Obama’s deal with the terrorist government of Iran is a treaty, then, by our Constitution, it needs a two thirds approval vote in the Senate to be finalized.

In discussing this issue, it is important to note a fundamental rule of constitutional construction:

16 Am Jur 2d Constitutional law
Meaning of Language
Ordinary meaning, generally

”Words or terms used in a constitution, being dependent on ratification by the people voting upon it, must be understood in the sense most obvious to the common understanding at the time of its adoption…”__ (my emphasis)

So, in determining if Obama’s deal with a terrorist government is a treaty, we must determine what the meaning of a treaty is as expressed by our forefathers during the time of our Constitution’s framing and ratification process.

In Federalist No. 64 John Jay defines a treaty as a “bargain” . He writes:

”These gentlemen would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us, which should be binding on them ABSOLUTELY, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to be bound by it.”

And in Federalist No. 75 Hamilton tells us with reference to a treaty, “Its objects are CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law…” And he goes on to explain why the president was not granted an arbitrary power to make “CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law” unless approved by a two thirds vote. Hamilton points out the president, if he had such power:

“might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”

And James Wilson, who attended the Convention of 1787 says the following during the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention:

“Treaties, sir, are truly contracts, or compacts, between the different states, nations, or princes, who find it convenient or necessary to enter into them.” ___ 11 Dec. 1787 Elliot 2:505--7

And our very own Supreme Court, in FOSTER v. NEILSON, (1829) Chief Justice Marshall says:

“A treaty is in its nature a contract between two nations, not a legislative act”.

Now that we know what a treaty is, as expressed by our forefathers and our very own Supreme Court, what power has been granted to Obama with regard to him making deals with foreign government?

The President “… shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”


To pretend Obama has power to make a deal with Iran’s terrorist government without the various States approval by the required two thirds vote, is a narfarious outright lie and attempted subjugation of our written Constitution.

Keep in mind what Hamilton warns, which is especially applicable to Obama and why a two thirds vote is required:


Obama “might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”

Obama has consorted with the enemy, is attempting to finalize a deal with a terrorist government which will help to finance this terrorist government’s activities and the building of a nuclear war machine. And those who support this attack on America’s general welfare pretend this is not a treaty to avoid the two thirds vote threshold necessary to approve Obama’s treachery.


JWK

When will the America People realize we have an Islamic cell operating out of our nation's White House? Will they come to this conclusion when Obama allows Iran to make the component parts for a nuclear arsenal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,016 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Obama's nuke deal requires the United States to defend a terrorist government!

How can any patriotic American support Obama's nuke deal which requires America to defend a terrorist government if that government's nuclear weapons manufacturing facilities are attacked? Why on earth would Obama obligate the United States to defend a terrorist government?


See Kerry Admits U.S. Will Help Protect Iran’s Nuclear Program From Sabotage


” Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) asked the assembled officials whether a controversial provision in Annex III of the agreement obligated the United States to help protect Iran’s nuclear program from future sabotage by Iran’s opponents, notably Israel.

The charge was ducked, but not denied, by Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz.

“I believe that refers to things like physical security and safeguards,” Moniz said. “All of our options and those of our allies and friends will remain in place.”

Secretary of State John Kerry clarified that the annex in question was designed to ensure that Iran’s nuclear capacity was “adequately protected” from unconventional threats such as cyber warfare.”



JWK



Obama’s nuke deal, if finalized, will guarantee our children and grandchildren will live under the fear of nuclear war like America did under the cold war with the Soviet Union.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,050 Posts
I was going to post something similar as I have a copy of the constitution, but you beat me to it. Good Job. :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,016 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I was under the impression that this IS NOT considered a Treaty. Therefore not 2/3s needed
What is the definition of a "treaty" as expressed by our forefathers during the time our Constitution was framed and ratified? See the OP for the answer.


JWK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,200 Posts
What is the definition of a "treaty" as expressed by our forefathers during the time our Constitution was framed and ratified? See the OP for the answer.


JWK
Oh, I agree.
My only point is, NOTHING this proposed, "Constitutional" lawyer, has ratified has been to the letter of the Constitution. I meant to say he and his administration are claiming it is not a Treaty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,375 Posts
Oh, I agree.
My only point is, NOTHING this proposed, "Constitutional" lawyer, has ratified has been to the letter of the Constitution. I meant to say he and his administration are claiming it is not a Treaty.
So why wouldn't his opponents use this route to defeat the deal? Because only Johnwk knows it or maybe Johnwk has no clue what he is talking about? Think about it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,011 Posts
johnwk your pissing in the wind. Nothing will happen as long as the two spineless pu$$ies Boehner and Mconnell are where they are. Just sad that this party is so split.
ha ha ha love it ..hope the repubs keep butting heads love to read and watch the reds implode !!! brings a warm feeling in my democratic heart!!!!!bbbbbuuuuuuwwwwaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,320 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,210 Posts
I realize this isn't a done deal but it's close.

Suppose it turns out down the road this is a bad deal, what is the real process to undo it ?

There must be a way. I just can't see our country doing some of the seemly goofy stuff some claim it would be required to do.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top