There’s a lot of confusion out there about what just happened with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).The first thing we need to understand is this entire episode should have been regarded as a treaty by the Constitution. The machinations instituted completely bastardized the established process we have within our Rule of Law.
The second point is that upon assuming control of the US Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell reversed Harry Reid’s filibuster rule and returned it back to the 60-vote threshold. Since the JCPOA was not brought forth as a treaty, it was not about President Obama getting approval — two thirds — it was about his surviving disapproval by way of veto. This is what the Republican-controlled Senate agreed to. When it was brought to the floor for vote, only one senator voted against the measure — Arkansas Freshman Senator Tom Cotton — who was viciously assailed. In hindsight, he was courageous, and right.The result is that 42 Senate Democrats blocked the resolution for disapproval of the JCPOA from even coming to the Senate floor, so President Obama doesn’t even have to use his veto. If Majority Leader McConnell had kept the filibuster threshold Reid had implemented, this wouldn’t have been possible because it would have been a simple majority.
As Fox News reports:
Senate Democrats voted to uphold the hard-fought nuclear accord with Iran on Thursday, overcoming ferocious GOP opposition and delivering President Barack Obama a legacy-making victory on his top foreign policy priority.A disapproval resolution for the agreement fell two votes short of the 60 needed to move forward as most Democratic and independent senators banded together against it. Although House Republicans continued to pursue eleventh-hour strategies to derail the international accord and Senate Republicans promised a re-vote, Thursday’s outcome all but guaranteed that the disapproval legislation would not reach Obama’s desk.
As a result the nuclear deal will move forward unchecked by Congress, an improbable win by Obama in the face of unanimous opposition from Republicans who control Capitol Hill, GOP candidates seeking to replace him in the Oval Office and the state of Israel and its allied lobbyists in the U.S.
Beginning next week, Obama will be free to start scaling back U.S. sanctions to implement the agreement negotiated by Iran, the U.S. and five other world powers. The accord aims to constrain Iran’s nuclear ambitions in exchange for hundreds of billions of dollars in relief from international sanctions.“This vote is a victory for diplomacy, for American national security and for the safety and security of the world,” the president said in a statement. “Going forward, we will turn to the critical work of implementing and verifying this deal so that Iran cannot pursue a nuclear weapon.”
I find it unconscionable that President Obama continues to promote his own false narrative. It’s as if he’s not been privy to the news — for example, that Iran’s supreme leader has vowed Americans will not be part of any inspection team.
The word I’ve received from Capitol Hill is that the GOP-controlled Senate is scrambling to try and find other courses of action to revisit a vote.My recommendation is that they just drop it. Drop it because they’ve already been utterly embarrassed and made to look abjectly incompetent. The GOP asked for a Senate majority, got it — and yet, sadly, they still found a way to secure defeat from the jaws of victory.
And so on Monday, President Barack Obama will be known as a financier to the number one state sponsor of Islamic terrorism. Let him own this. And every single one of the 42 Democrats who voted to block the JCPOA coming to the floor, let them own this.
This is no different from the Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank, all the excessive regulations and the incessant executive orders. Let Obama and his progressive socialist acolytes own it all. Let the American people start to realize what happens when the country is ruled instead of governed.
Is that a message of surrender? Nope, it’s a message of hard truth and finally allowing the consequences of progressive socialism to be felt. What also needs to happen is the GOP making a decision to raise up a new crop of principled leaders, who are not so weak and will fight for this republic and put the liberal progressive left on the defense.
What happened with the JCPOA shouldn’t have occurred if those in GOP “leadership” positions had stood upon the rule of law and our governing process. If Senate Majority Leader McConnell had simply looked the cameras in the eye and said, nope, we’re keeping the filibuster thresholds right where Harry Reid put them; remember, “If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, it’s because your tactics suck”. Somebody needs to send the Congressional GOP leadership to a small unit tactics course — Marine Corps Infantry Officer Course is right there in Quantico, Virginia. Hint, hint…
The troubling matter is that we’re watching the end of “bipartisanship,” and it’s not at the hands of Republicans — who are just trying too hard to play nice. You’re watching Democrats advance their agenda by any means necessary and taking no prisoners en route.
When you consider that all of Barack Obama’s major domestic, foreign policy and national security “achievements” have been accomplished with no GOP support, that’s quite telling. And the left loves to demonize the constitutional conservative grassroots movement as intolerant and dangerous. What do you call a president and a party that blocked a measure to preclude providing billions of dollars to the number one sponsor of Islamic terrorism the day before 9-11?
The American people didn’t want this, as a recent polling report from McLaughlin and Associates articulates:
Our just completed national poll of 800 likely 2016 voters interviewed on September 2nd and 3rd shows that:
- 69 percent of voters believe the US Congress should be required to vote on the Iran deal. Only 22 percent say let it go into effect without a vote. Indeed even Democrats by 10 points believe that a vote should be required.
- 78 percent want their senators and congressman to vote no on the deal because it lifts sanctions and provides Iran with $100 billion that it can use to finance its terrorist activities. Only 10 percent said yes. 64 percent of the Democrats say vote no.
Even more ominous, there is a real prospect of potential political damage for the supporters of this deal. Consider these results:
- Only 29 percent said they would vote for their senators or congressmen if they supported the deal. A majority said they would NOT EVER vote for that person again in the future. Forty five percent of Democrats expressing an opinion said that they would not vote for their senator ever again and 66 percent of independents expressing a view said they would never vote for that person again.
- 65 percent say that it is so important that Congress votes on the Iran deal that if their senators voted to stop a vote in the Senate that they would never vote for them again. Only 24 percent say that it is unnecessary to vote. A plurality of Democrats (45 percent) say that it is important that there be a vote.
Let Obama and his chosen successor, Joe Biden, own this. Let every single Democrat Senator who voted to block this disapproval resolution from even reaching the Senate floor face the American people. Let every single Democrat in the US House who sided with Iran — over the families of those who lost loved ones and those maimed for life because of Iranian IEDs — suffer the consequences.
The story is simple: as we remembered the savage barbarism and butchery of Islamic terrorists on 9/11, the Democrat party sided with an Islamist sympathizer, Barack Obama, and aligned themselves with Iran.
And ask yourself, where are Saeed Abedini, Amir Hekmati, Robert Levinson and Jason Reznain? Their fate is far less important to the progressive socialist Democrat party when it comes to giving Obama what he wants.
Yes, Ladies and Gents, it can no longer be debated: today’s Democrat party is the party of treacherous treason — and I challenge anyone to debate that fact-based assertion.