Congressional Smackdown

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
Post Reply
rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Congressional Smackdown

Post by rubato »

Delivered by the Iranian Leader:

Iran leader: We are in talks with ‘the major powers,’ not the U.S. Congress
By Karen DeYoung, Mike DeBonis, and Daniela Deane April 15 at 5:09 AM

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Wednesday that Tehran was negotiating a comprehensive nuclear deal with world powers, not the U.S. Congress, and called a Senate committee’s vote to give Congress the power to review any potential deal a domestic U.S. matter.

The Iranian leader, speaking in a televised speech in the northern Iranian city of Rasht, also repeated earlier statements that his country will not accept any comprehensive nuclear deal with world powers unless all sanctions imposed against it are lifted.

“We are in talks with the major powers and not with the Congress,” Rouhani said, Iranian state television reported. Rouhani said the U.S. Congress’ power to review a nuclear deal with Iran was a domestic U.S. matter, the Reuters news agency reported.

He said Iran wanted to end its isolation from the world by constructing “constructive interaction with the world and not confrontation.”

Rouhani’s comments came one day after a Senate committee voted unanimously to give Congress the power to review a potential Iran nuclear deal after a June 30 negotiating deadline, in a compromise with the White House that allows President Obama to avoid possible legislative disapproval of the pact before it can be completed.

Weak is as weak does. Even the Iranians can diss the Republican congress.


yrs,
rubato
Last edited by rubato on Wed Apr 15, 2015 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

Calling that nice Iranian gentleman 'weak''! Well, that's not fair.
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Lord Jim »

Actually, it was more of a "White House Smackdown":
Obama Yields, Allowing Congress Say on Iran Nuclear Deal

WASHINGTON — The White House relented on Tuesday and said President Obama would sign a compromise bill giving Congress a voice on the proposed nuclear accord with Iran as the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in rare unanimous agreement, moved the legislation to the full Senate for a vote.

An unusual alliance of Republican opponents of the nuclear deal and some of Mr. Obama’s strongest Democratic supporters demanded a congressional role as international negotiators work to turn this month’s nuclear framework into a final deal by June 30. White House officials insisted they extracted crucial last-minute concessions. Republicans — and many Democrats — said the president simply got overrun.

“We’re involved here. We have to be involved here,” said Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, the committee’s ranking Democrat, who served as a bridge between the White House and Republicans as they negotiated changes in the days before the committee’s vote on Tuesday. “Only Congress can change or permanently modify the sanctions regime.”


The essence of the legislation is that Congress will have a chance to vote on whatever deal emerges with Iran — if one is reached by June 30 — but in a way that would be extremely difficult for Mr. Obama to lose, allowing Secretary of State John Kerry to tell his Iranian counterpart that the risk that an agreement would be upended on Capitol Hill is limited.

As Congress considers any accord on a very short timetable, it would essentially be able to vote on an eventual end to sanctions, and then later take up the issue depending on whether Iran has met its own obligations. But if it rejected the agreement, Mr. Obama could veto that legislation — and it would take only 34 senators to sustain the veto, meaning that Mr. Obama could lose upward of a dozen Democratic senators and still prevail.

The bill would require that the administration send the text of a final accord, along with classified material, to Congress as soon as it is completed. It also halts any lifting of sanctions pending a 30-day congressional review, and culminates in a possible vote to allow or forbid the lifting of congressionally imposed sanctions in exchange for the dismantling of much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. It passed 19 to 0.

Why Mr. Obama gave in after fierce opposition was the last real dispute of what became a rout. Josh Earnest, the White House spokesman, said Mr. Obama was not “particularly thrilled” with the bill, but had decided that a new proposal put together by the top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee made enough changes to make it acceptable.

“We’ve gone from a piece of legislation that the president would veto to a piece of legislation that’s undergone substantial revision such that it’s now in the form of a compromise that the president would be willing to sign,” Mr. Earnest said. “That would certainly be an improvement.”

Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee and the committee’s chairman, had a far different interpretation. As late as 11:30 a.m., in a classified briefing at the Capitol, Mr. Kerry was urging senators to oppose the bill. The “change occurred when they saw how many senators were going to vote for this, and only when that occurred,” Mr. Corker said.

Mr. Cardin said that the “fundamental provisions” of the legislation had not changed.


But the compromise between him and Mr. Corker did shorten a review period of a final Iran nuclear deal and soften language that would make the lifting of sanctions dependent on Iran’s ending support for terrorism.

The agreement almost certainly means Congress will muscle its way into nuclear negotiations that Mr. Obama sees as a legacy-defining foreign policy achievement.

The Senate is expected to vote on the legislation this month, and House Republican leaders have promised to pass it shortly after.

“Congress absolutely should have the opportunity to review this deal,” the House speaker, John A. Boehner of Ohio, said Tuesday. “We shouldn’t just count on the administration, who appears to want a deal at any cost.”

White House officials blitzed Congress in the days after the framework of a nuclear deal was announced, making 130 phone calls to lawmakers, but quickly came to the conclusion that the legislation could not be blocked altogether.

Democrats had implored Mr. Obama to embrace the legislation.

“If the administration can’t persuade 34 senators of whatever party that this agreement is worth proceeding with, then it’s really a bad agreement,” Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, a Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said. “That’s the threshold.”

To temper opposition to the deal, Mr. Kerry, Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew and Energy Secretary Ernest J. Moniz gathered with senators Tuesday morning in a classified briefing, after a similar briefing on Monday for the House.

But the administration met firm opposition in both parties.

The agreement “puts Iran, the world’s worst state sponsor of terrorism, on the path to a nuclear weapon,” said Senator Tom Cotton, Republican of Arkansas, as he emerged from the briefing. “Whether that’s a matter of months or a matter of years, that’s a dangerous outcome not just to United States and allies like Israel but to the entire world.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/15/us/se ... .html?_r=0
Last edited by Lord Jim on Wed Apr 15, 2015 8:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 15386
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Joe Guy »

Image

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Big RR »

And Congress is a major part of the leadership of a major power; thankfully we do not live in a dictatorship or other system ruled by one person. If Iran doesn't like our system of government, too damn bad.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Lord Jim »

Even the Iranians can diss the Republican congress.
a Senate committee voted unanimously
That "senate committee" would be the Senate Foreign Relations Committee...

Rube, you do know that committee is comprised of 10 Republicans and nine Democrats...

(Including such unlikely bedfellows as Babs Boxer and Marco Rubio...)

Or perhaps you don't...

Or perhaps you don't understand what the word "unanimous" means...

(One certainly can't rule that out...)
ImageImageImage

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by wesw »

bravo to the senate FR committee. there may be hope for our system of govt yet.

cheers to RR, jeers for rube.

I have become convinced that some on the left, many it seems, are willing to divide and destroy our system of govt to achieve whatever ends they desire, rather than working thru it to implement change.

i believe that our imperial president, and the bush and Clinton dynasties , have lost more public support than the media lets on

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Big RR »

I have become convinced that some on the left, many it seems, are willing to divide and destroy our system of govt to achieve whatever ends they desire, rather than working thru it to implement change.
not only on the left, wes, but on the right and whatever other sides there are. The ideas of compromise and statesmanship have become dirty words to some, who then seek to block those efforts to the detriment of us all.

wesw
Posts: 9646
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2014 1:24 am
Location: the eastern shore

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by wesw »

yes, on the right as well. ted cruz comes to mind. tom delay and newt gingrich are gone tho . reid and, i believe, Pelosi will soon follow. good riddance to the lot of them.

when i was a young man i considered the right to be more nasty and dishonest and corrupt than the left. it seems to me that the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction these days.

Big RR
Posts: 14907
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by Big RR »

the biggest problem with Congressional deadlock IMHO is that it pushes us more and more to a strong presidency which will act unilaterally and be cheered on by the people sing of the bickering. We've always seen a little of that, but I think more and more people will not find it objectionable if congress doesn't get its act together. Things like this latest bill show that it can get deals done, but there must be a will to do so, and an honest understanding that compromise means you will not get everything you wanted, and that such deals need to be struck. Certainly everyone can have one or two non-negotiable issues, but it cannot be that way with every issue.

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: Congressional Smackdown

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

People Sing of the Bickering. What is that... another Bono idea?

:lol:
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

Post Reply