It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Ahabstar
For a Constitutional scholar, he seems rather intent on ignoring it on a regular basis.
The Obama administration hinted Thursday that it may take elements of an Iranian nuclear deal to the United Nations—while bypassing Congress for now.
Asked about the potential of a U.N. role in the Iran deal, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Thursday, "I'm not going to prejudge what step would be taken or wouldn't be taken."
originally posted by: blargo
a reply to: Krazysh0t
That is why I really dislike these process arguments. This is a pretty standard process in the modern era. All the presidents did it. Argue about what is in the agreement and that is fair game. But these process arguments as if Obama or W Bush before are the first to do such a thing is crazy.
(Reuters) - Major world powers have begun talks about a United Nations Security Council resolution to lift U.N. sanctions on Iran if a nuclear agreement is struck with Tehran, a step that could make it harder for the U.S. Congress to undo a deal, Western officials said.
The talks between Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States — the five permanent members of the Security Council — plus Germany and Iran, are taking place ahead of difficult negotiations that resume next week over constricting Iran's nuclear ability.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry told Congress on Wednesday that an Iran nuclear deal would not be legally binding, meaning future U.S. presidents could decide not to implement it. That point was emphasized in an open letter by 47 Republican senators sent on Monday to Iran's leaders asserting any deal could be discarded once President Barack Obama leaves office in January 2017.
But a Security Council resolution on a nuclear deal with Iran could be legally binding, say Western diplomatic officials. That could complicate and possibly undercut future attempts by Republicans in Washington to unravel an agreement.
originally posted by: AboveBoard
The problem is Congress wants CONTROL over this process, and believes that removing sanctions = automatic nuclear bomb.
originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
Excellent post, AB!
Everything is secondary to screwing Obama.
originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Ahabstar
If the GOP weren't trying to undermine proper diplomatic relations between the US and Iran, then this probably would not have occurred in the first place.
The GOP congress of the last 8 years has been the most ineffective in a really long time.
It's a tit for tat battle, and the GOP started it, by literally stating that their mission during Obama's presidency, was to be disruptive and halt any and all agendas put forward by his administration.
That's not politics, it's not democracy, that's just irresponsible, ineffective and quite frankly dangerous. As it prevents the country as a whole from moving forward.