Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Treaty Clause (is Iran deal a treaty or an executive agreement?)

Heritage Foundation ^ | n/a | Michael D. Ramsey 

... while the Treaty Clause was, in the original understanding, the exclusive way to make treaties, the Framers also apparently recognized a class of less-important international agreements, not rising to the level of "treaties," which could be approved in some other way. Article I, Section 10, in describing restrictions upon the states, speaks of "Treat[ies]" and "Agreement[s]...with a foreign Power" as two distinct categories. Some scholars believe this shows that not all international agreements are treaties, and that these other agreements would not need to go through the procedures of the Treaty Clause. Instead, the President, in the exercise of his executive power, could conclude such agreements on his own. Still, this exception for lesser agreements would have to be limited to "agreements" of minor importance, or else it would provide too great an avenue for evasion of the protections the Framers placed in the Treaty Clause.
A more substantial departure from the Framers' vision may arise from the practice of "executive agreements." According to the Restatement of Foreign Relations Law of the United States, the President may validly conclude executive agreements that (1) cover matters that are solely within his executive power, or (2) are made pursuant to a treaty, or (3) are made pursuant to a legitimate act of Congress. Examples of important executive agreements include the Potsdam and Yalta agreements of World War II, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which regulated international trade for decades, and the numerous status-of-forces agreements the United States has concluded with foreign governments.

The Democrats have created their illegal alien ‘brooms” that will eventually sweep us all away!

Coach is Right ^ | 4/15/15 | Kevin "Coach" Collins 

Karl Marx who would be a Democrat Senator if he was alive today said, “The last capitalist we hang shall be the one who sold us the rope.” 

Last week’s runoff mayoral election in Chicago brought this quote to mind. It also suggested a comparison to the plot of Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice.
In that production we see Mickey Mouse working as an apprentice to a sorcerer who orders him to tend to a series of chores that includes fetching water. Seeing his opportunity to use the power in the sorcerer’s wand for his own benefit, Mickey commands a broom to carry the water for him. He soon discovers that it is easier to start the broom than to stop it.
The broom soon spills water everywhere in the castle because Mickey doesn’t know how to turn it off. In a desperate attempt to gain control he takes an axe to the broom. This only makes more brooms that carry more water. With water everywhere, just when things look totally lost, the sorcerer arrives and takes over. He quickly reverses the mischief done by Mickey and all is well in the castle again.
In many ways Chicago’s large and growing Hispanic illegal alien population reminds us of the broom that crooked Chicago Democrats have set against themselves. Based on the election’s result which saw a Hispanic unknown getting 44% of the votes, they have discovered they might not be able to stop their “brooms” from drowning them.
The full breakdown of where Rahm Emanuel’s votes came from is not available...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Iran would like to make a few ‘revisions’ to the nuclear deal

Hotair ^ | 04/15/2015 | Noah Rothman 

Ever since the White House secured its framework agreement with Iran to prevent the state from developing atomic weapons, the administration has been focused on shoring up American domestic support for the prospective nuclear deal.
Facing the prospect of a veto-proof majority in the Senate for a bill that would reassert Congress’s authority to ratify foreign agreements, the White House appears to have backed off its earlier opposition to allowing congressional lawmakers the ability to scrutinize and approve of the arrangement with Iran.
But extending to the deal’s critics on Capitol Hill the power to modify its terms could have far-reaching implications. “The bill, once signed, would also give lawmakers access to the full text of the deal as well as any classified information underlying it,” The Daily Beast’s Shane Harris reported.
One change to the bill now gives Congress 52 days to review the final agreement, instead of 60. But that still gives lawmakers plenty of time to have their say and potentially muck up the works. The White House would also now be freed from from having to certify that Iran no longer supports terrorism. But the original legislation also didn’t expressly tie that certification to the lifting of sanctions.
Congress isn’t the only party that would like to revise the terms agreed to in Lausanne. According to CNN security reporter Elise Labott, Iran’s parliament is also making revisions to the arrangement that American negotiators are probably going to find unacceptable.

And that’s why you always write your legacy-sealing diplomatic agreements with hostile and revisionist powers down on paper.
“The factsheet urges operation of 10,000 centrifuge machines at Natanz and Fordo, a maximum 5-year-long duration for the deal and Iran’s nuclear limitations, replacement of the current centrifuges with the latest generation of home-made centrifuge machines at the end of the five-year period,” read an Iranian statement published by the Iranian Fars News Agency.
The text of the factsheet which was presented by Head of the Nuclear Committee Ebrahim Karkhaneyee on Wednesday includes the necessity for respecting the redlines and guidelines specified by Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei, the reversible nature of Iran’s decisions in case of the other side’s non-commitment to its undertakings and the annulment of all sanctions together immediately after the first day of implementation of the final agreement.
The revision also necessitates commitment to both sides’ undertakings based on the Geneva agreement, fair and reasonable relations between the givings and takings, not impairing the country’s security and military boundaries and national interests, providing 190,000 SWUs (Separative Work Units) of nuclear fuel enrichment capability needed by Iran, production of fuel for Bushehr nuclear power plant immediately after the end of contract with Russia, safeguarding the nuclear achievements, actual operation of all nuclear installations of Iran not in words, but in action, continued Research and Development (R&D) works and scientific and technological progress in Iran and the immediate use of the results of R&D in the country’s industrial enrichment cycle.
It is safe to say that international observers who were disappointed with the terms John Kerry and others agreed to in Switzerland will find Iran’s revisions to be laughable.
On Wednesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani added that the Islamic Republic would only accept the terms of a final nuclear arrangement if all sanctions against Iran were lifted before that accord went into effect. “If there is no end to sanctions, there will not be an agreement,” Rouhani said in a televised interview.
If Russia’s decision to lift a moratorium on the sale of advanced S-300 anti-air missiles to Iran, effectively neutralizing the West’s ability to execute strikes against Iranian nuclear targets without great human cost, hasn’t made the administration think twice about this deal, nothing will. But if it seemed like it would be a hard task to reach a final deal in June when the framework agreement was revealed in March, it appears like a nearly impossible challenge today.

What Will Bill Clinton Do in the White House? (*Bubba's concubine gets a key?)

U.S. News & World Report via MSN ^ | 4/14/15 | Kenneth T. Walsh 

How long Bill's restraint lasts this time is anybody's guess. So far, he is being cautious and, in a burst of humility, is even raising doubts about his own political powers. "I've told Hillary that I don't think I'm good [at campaigning] anymore, because I'm not mad at anybody," he said to Town & Country Magazine recently. "I'm a grandfather, and I got to see my granddaughter last night, and I can't be mad." He said his role in his wife's campaign will be mostly as a "backstage adviser to her until we get much, much closer to the election."

The Clinton's see eye to eye on most issues and both are basically pragmatic liberals. Many Americans remember the Bill Clinton era as one of peace and prosperity, and Hillary will benefit from this connection, although his problem with the Monica Lewinsky sex-and-lies scandal remains an uncomfortable part of history for both of them.

What set Bill Clinton apart in a positive way was his empathy and his ability to persuade everyday people that he understood their problems and worked constantly to help them. Projecting such empathy is one of Hillary Clinton's goals in 2016, her advisers say, but it doesn't come as easily to her as it did to her husband.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

a chance!


Who's the racist?


a few words!




You may be...


Here's a question...






No Water Allowed!


Who is it?


Obama's World


The Experiment


A Prog


Suck Dynasty






From somebody else




Loving Expressions