The Iran Nuclear Deal Is ***The Law of the Land***

[Contumacious]

"President Barak Obama violated the United States Constitution by illegally negotiating a TREATY on behalf of the United States, an act he did NOT have the legal authority to do."

Explain why he didn't have the authority

You want me to read you the exact passages from the U.S. Constitution or do you think you can look them up for yourself?

What am I asking for? Unless you are spoon-fed you snowflakes won't look anything up!

"The Constitution provides that 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" (Article II, section 2)."

Former President Obama COMPLETELY BY-PASSED CONGRESS in order to negotiate his 'deal'. He neither 'ought 'advice' or 'consent' from the Senate BEFORE he engaged in negotiations with Iran, Once his 'deal' was done he immediately took it to the U.N. for ratification.

Forget '2/3rds of Senators approving' - He by-passed Congress AGAIN, refusing to allow them to even read it....because he KNEW it would not pass...before running to the U.N. to get it ratified.

The US Senate amended the treaty statute in 1948



Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2.


This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

.

 

[boedicca]

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

 

[Contumacious]

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

 

[easyt65]

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

Congress did not abdicate any powers / authority as specified by the US constitution. You seem to be saying Congress can legally change the authorities given by the Constitution by simply saying, "Nah, I don't feel like doing that today - YOU do it.'

The powers and authorities are specified by the Constitution, and Obama illegally negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States, power / authority NOT given to him by the Constitution...no matter how much he wanted to BE a dictator.

The 'deal' was non-binding as it was nothing more than a deal between Barry, a US citizen, and the nation of Iran.

 

[BlindBoo]

So if it is technically the law of the land, could his order to quit the deal be challenged in court then?

Would that piss him off?

 

[cnm]

The JCPOA is not a treaty.

The UN Charter is.

 

[easyt65]

So if it is technically the law of the land, could his order to quit the deal be challenged in court then?

Would that piss him off?

Law of WHAT 'Land'?

The illegitimate 'deal' was negotiated in violation of the Constitution. It is not the 'Law of the Land' in the US. Much like every other Un-Constitutional attempted 'edict' or 'Legacy' Obama attempted, the current President has wiped them out.

Again, the U.N. can do anything it wants. Trump's decision can not be challenged here in the US because it was never legitimate to begin with, much like Obama's 'DACA edict', his attempt to push the socialist agenda item into being the unofficial 'Law of the Land'.

 

[Contumacious]

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

Congress did not abdicate any powers / authority as specified by the US constitution. You seem to be saying Congress can legally change the authorities given by the Constitution by simply saying, "Nah, I don't feel like doing that today - YOU do it.'

The powers and authorities are specified by the Constitution, and Obama illegally negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States, power / authority NOT given to him by the Constitution...no matter how much he wanted to BE a dictator.

The 'deal' was non-binding as it was nothing more than a deal between Barry, a US citizen, and the nation of Iran.

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

Congress did not abdicate any powers / authority as specified by the US constitution. You seem to be saying Congress can legally change the authorities given by the Constitution by simply saying, "Nah, I don't feel like doing that today - YOU do it.'

The powers and authorities are specified by the Constitution, and Obama illegally negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States, power / authority NOT given to him by the Constitution...no matter how much he wanted to BE a dictator.

The 'deal' was non-binding as it was nothing more than a deal between Barry, a US citizen, and the nation of Iran.

You are going to have to sue to abolish the United Nations Charter:

Harry Truman looks on as Secretary of State Edward R. Stettinius signs the United Nations Security Charter for the U.S


Senate Ratifies United Nations Charter, July 28, 1945

By ANDREW GLASS



On this day in 1945, as World War II drew to a close, the Senate ratified the United Nations Charter by 89-2. Its approval signaled a sea change in U.S. involvement in world affairs.

________


Unless you get the statute repealed you can bitch but to no effect

.

 

[martybegan]

The Iran Nuclear Deal Isn’t Just a Good Idea — It’s the Law

by THOMAS KNAPP

On May 8, President Donald Trump announced US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, colloquially known as “the Iran nuclear deal.”

While that decision has come under criticism for being both a really bad idea and a severe betrayal of trust, both of which are true, it’s worth noting that the US withdrawal is also a breach of treaty obligations, and that such obligations are, per the US Constitution and co-equal with it, “the Supreme Law of the Land.”

Under Article 25 of the UN Charter, “members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.”

On July 20, 2015, the members of that body, including the United States, unanimously endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

It seems unlikely that Samantha Power, US ambassador to the UN at the time, didn’t know what she was committing the US government to when she voted for the resolution rather than exercising the US’s veto power on the Security Council. After all, the resolution itself contains text “nderscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions.”


.

President Barak Obama violated the United States Constitution by illegally negotiating a TREATY on behalf of the United States, an act he did NOT have the legal authority to do.

As such, the document Obama took to the U.N. - again by-passing Congress without allowing them the opportunity to look at it - was an agreement between the U.S. CITIZEN Barak Obama and the Nation of Iran.

Failing to have the authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States in such a capacity, nothing within Obama's personal treaty is legally binding for the united States.

The United nations was DUPED by the former President, who presented them with an illegally negotiated Treaty that was not worth the paper it was written on regarding its legal status as an official Treaty / Agreement involving the United States.

Democrats / Snowflakes can invoke Slick Willy's argument based on semantics if they want, but it does not change the fact that what Obama attempted to do and thought he had done was negotiate a legally binding TREATY with Iran on behalf of the United States. He thought wrong.....

Snowflakes can continue to worship, praise, and fawn all over the dictator-wannabe who made it a habit of violating the Constitution, and Rule of law if they want.

The U.N. can do whatever it wants to do. Every nation in the world can do what it wants to do.

The United States will not have its hands tied by a former President who claimed powers and authorities he did not have, who violated the Constitution and illegally, illegitimately negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States.

Now Iran is freed from any restraints and can build a nuke.

Way to go conservatives, way to go.

Like this deal was actually stopping them if they really wanted to continue....

 

[martybegan]

So if it is technically the law of the land, could his order to quit the deal be challenged in court then?

Would that piss him off?

Law of WHAT 'Land'?

The illegitimate 'deal' was negotiated in violation of the Constitution. It is not the 'Law of the Land' in the US. Much like every other Un-Constitutional attempted 'edict' or 'Legacy' Obama attempted, the current President has wiped them out.

Again, the U.N. can do anything it wants. Trump's decision can not be challenged here in the US because it was never legitimate to begin with, much like Obama's 'DACA edict', his attempt to push the socialist agenda item into being the unofficial 'Law of the Land'.

Plus didn't the agreement have a clause that detailed how a country can leave the agreement?

 

[cnm]

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate.

Is it not a UNSC Resolution which the US is bound to obey as signatory to the UN Charter? Why yes, it is.

Underscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions,
1. Endorses the JCPOA, and urges its full implementation on the timetable established in the JCPOA;
2. Calls upon all Members States, regional organizations and international organizations to take such actions as may be appropriate to support the implementation of the JCPOA, including by taking actions commensurate with the implementation plan set out in the JCPOA and this resolution and by refraining from actions that undermine implementation of commitments under the JCPOA;
http://www.un.org/​

 

[edthecynic]

The JCPOA is not a treaty. Technically, it isn't even an executive agreement. However, all the parties concerned treat it as an executive agreement.

Therefore, not "the law of the land". Whoever wrote that article is an idiot.

Actually it is INTERNATIONAL LAW agreed to by the USA representative to the UN. So it IS the law of the international land which includes the land of the USA.

 

[Doc1]

The Iran Nuclear Deal Isn’t Just a Good Idea — It’s the Law

by THOMAS KNAPP

On May 8, President Donald Trump announced US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, colloquially known as “the Iran nuclear deal.”

While that decision has come under criticism for being both a really bad idea and a severe betrayal of trust, both of which are true, it’s worth noting that the US withdrawal is also a breach of treaty obligations, and that such obligations are, per the US Constitution and co-equal with it, “the Supreme Law of the Land.”

Under Article 25 of the UN Charter, “members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.”

On July 20, 2015, the members of that body, including the United States, unanimously endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

It seems unlikely that Samantha Power, US ambassador to the UN at the time, didn’t know what she was committing the US government to when she voted for the resolution rather than exercising the US’s veto power on the Security Council. After all, the resolution itself contains text “nderscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions.”


.

LOL, you people who have NO idea how these things work should just stay out of this shit.

 

[kaz]

The Iran Nuclear Deal Isn’t Just a Good Idea — It’s the Law

by THOMAS KNAPP

On May 8, President Donald Trump announced US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, colloquially known as “the Iran nuclear deal.”

While that decision has come under criticism for being both a really bad idea and a severe betrayal of trust, both of which are true, it’s worth noting that the US withdrawal is also a breach of treaty obligations, and that such obligations are, per the US Constitution and co-equal with it, “the Supreme Law of the Land.”

Under Article 25 of the UN Charter, “members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council.”

On July 20, 2015, the members of that body, including the United States, unanimously endorsed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in UN Security Council Resolution 2231.

It seems unlikely that Samantha Power, US ambassador to the UN at the time, didn’t know what she was committing the US government to when she voted for the resolution rather than exercising the US’s veto power on the Security Council. After all, the resolution itself contains text “nderscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions.”


.

President Barak Obama violated the United States Constitution by illegally negotiating a TREATY on behalf of the United States, an act he did NOT have the legal authority to do.

As such, the document Obama took to the U.N. - again by-passing Congress without allowing them the opportunity to look at it - was an agreement between the U.S. CITIZEN Barak Obama and the Nation of Iran.

Failing to have the authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States in such a capacity, nothing within Obama's personal treaty is legally binding for the united States.

The United nations was DUPED by the former President, who presented them with an illegally negotiated Treaty that was not worth the paper it was written on regarding its legal status as an official Treaty / Agreement involving the United States.

Democrats / Snowflakes can invoke Slick Willy's argument based on semantics if they want, but it does not change the fact that what Obama attempted to do and thought he had done was negotiate a legally binding TREATY with Iran on behalf of the United States. He thought wrong.....

Snowflakes can continue to worship, praise, and fawn all over the dictator-wannabe who made it a habit of violating the Constitution, and Rule of law if they want.

The U.N. can do whatever it wants to do. Every nation in the world can do what it wants to do.

The United States will not have its hands tied by a former President who claimed powers and authorities he did not have, who violated the Constitution and illegally, illegitimately negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States.

Everybody knew it wasn't a Treaty. Still, it doesn't matter even if it was a Treaty. We do what we want! Just ask the Natives how well we honor our Treaties.

No Senate ratify = not a treaty. Period

 

[Doc1]

The JCPOA is not a treaty. Technically, it isn't even an executive agreement. However, all the parties concerned treat it as an executive agreement.

Therefore, not "the law of the land". Whoever wrote that article is an idiot.

Actually it is INTERNATIONAL LAW agreed to by the USA representative to the UN. So it IS the law of the international land which includes the land of the USA.

Nope, sorry, You're stupid. We are sovereign and the Constitution clearly spells out how treaties are done. Next.

 

[Doc1]

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate.

Is it not a UNSC Resolution which the US is bound to obey as signatory to the UN Charter? Why yes, it is.

Underscoring that Member States are obligated under Article 25 of the Charter of the United Nations to accept and carry out the Security Council’s decisions,
1. Endorses the JCPOA, and urges its full implementation on the timetable established in the JCPOA;
2. Calls upon all Members States, regional organizations and international organizations to take such actions as may be appropriate to support the implementation of the JCPOA, including by taking actions commensurate with the implementation plan set out in the JCPOA and this resolution and by refraining from actions that undermine implementation of commitments under the JCPOA;
http://www.un.org/​

Too funny.
Next.

 

[cnm]

No Senate ratify = not a treaty. Period

The Senate ratified the UN Charter.

 

[cnm]

We are sovereign and the Constitution clearly spells out how treaties are done. Next.

The UN Charter, supreme US law (Article 6, clause 2), clearly spells out how Security Council resolutions are dealt with.

 

[cnm]

One can see why these dudes like The Donald. They think like him. Honouring agreements and contracts is for simps.

 

[boedicca]

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

Congress did not abdicate any powers / authority as specified by the US constitution. You seem to be saying Congress can legally change the authorities given by the Constitution by simply saying, "Nah, I don't feel like doing that today - YOU do it.'

The powers and authorities are specified by the Constitution, and Obama illegally negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States, power / authority NOT given to him by the Constitution...no matter how much he wanted to BE a dictator.

The 'deal' was non-binding as it was nothing more than a deal between Barry, a US citizen, and the nation of Iran.

Where is the Constitutional Amendment in which the U.S. voided its national sovereignity in favor of subjugation to the U.N.? I missed that bit of news.

Link?

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives the President the power “to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”

The United Nations Charter, delivered to the US Senate by President Harry Truman and duly ratified by that body on July 28, 1945 by a vote of 89-2.

.

That is in no way a Constitutional Provision for the U.S. to cede its power on future decisions to the UN.

And the Iran Deal itself is not a treaty approved by the Senate. Obabble knew it wouldn't pass, so he abused his executive power to put it in place.

You may not like the results but Congress abdicated its responsibility in 1948


and

They are about to abdicate their responsibility to declare war


Stop electing SCUMBAGS to Congress


.

Congress did not abdicate any powers / authority as specified by the US constitution. You seem to be saying Congress can legally change the authorities given by the Constitution by simply saying, "Nah, I don't feel like doing that today - YOU do it.'

The powers and authorities are specified by the Constitution, and Obama illegally negotiated a treaty / deal on behalf of the United States, power / authority NOT given to him by the Constitution...no matter how much he wanted to BE a dictator.

The 'deal' was non-binding as it was nothing more than a deal between Barry, a US citizen, and the nation of Iran.

You are going to have to sue to abolish the United Nations Charter:

Harry Truman looks on as Secretary of State Edward R. Stettinius signs the United Nations Security Charter for the U.S


Senate Ratifies United Nations Charter, July 28, 1945

By ANDREW GLASS



On this day in 1945, as World War II drew to a close, the Senate ratified the United Nations Charter by 89-2. Its approval signaled a sea change in U.S. involvement in world affairs.

________


Unless you get the statute repealed you can bitch but to no effect

.

I don't care about the UN Charter. The UN is not the boss of the U.S.