None 'Dare Call It Treason" - The #BadIranDeal

by Bill Smith; Today in Washington, D.C. - Sept. 8, 2015:
Congress returns from August recess.

The House will reconvene a t 2 PM today but will recess until 4 PM when members are expected to be back. While voice votes especially for unanimous consideration may be completed, no recorded votes are expected earlier than 6:30 PM

Also, While a lot of so-called clean-up bills and Government property bills may be considered today, no votes are expected on funding issues or on the Iran Deal today in the House.

The Senate will reconvene at 2 PM today and begin consideration H. J. Res. 61, the Resolution of Disapproval of the Iran Agreement. At 5:30 PM, the Senate will vote on confirmation of Roseann Ketchmark to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Today, the Senate will "begin" debate on a resolution of disapproval of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the president’s agreement with Iran over its nuclear program. However, no votes are expected today on the Iran Deal.

However, that does not mean there won't be a lot of rhetoric on the issue as detailed in the following news reports. The Washington Post writes, “Three Democratic senators announced Tuesday they will vote in support of the nuclear deal with Iran, appearing to pave the way for a filibuster of Republican-led attempts to disapprove of the controversial agreement.

“Pro-deal statements from Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) means 41 senators are now publicly backing the deal, enough to keep a disapproval resolution from emerging from the Senate and making its way to President Obama's desk and forcing a veto. . . .

“At the White House, press secretary Josh Earnest said the administration felt ‘gratified’ by the growing support for the Iran nuclear deal, and he suggested that the White House expects Democratic supporters to filibuster the vote to disapprove the accord.”

In an editorial last week, The Wall Street Journal warned, “Democrats had better hope it succeeds because they are taking responsibility for Iran’s compliance and imperial ambitions. . . .

“Democrats will reinforce their ownership if they now use a Senate filibuster to block a vote on the motion of disapproval. More than 50 Senators are expected to oppose the deal, and a large bipartisan majority will oppose it in the House. Yet the White House is pushing for 41 Senate Democrats to enforce a filibuster, so that a bipartisan motion of disapproval dies in the Senate and Mr. Obama wouldn’t have to veto.

“But what a spectacle that would be—the President’s party using a procedural dodge to avoid voting on the merits of so consequential a deal. Previous arms-control pacts of this magnitude were submitted as treaties requiring two-thirds approval by the Senate. Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats maneuvered the Iran deal as an “executive agreement,” so he is able to commit America to trusting the Ayatollahs with the support of a mere partisan minority. At least ObamaCare had a partisan majority.”Speaking on the Senate floor today, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said, “The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed the Senate by a vote of 98 to 1 earlier this year. It provided each of us with the opportunity to truly represent our constituents on this issue. I expect that every Senator who voted for that measure is now entitled to an up or down vote — not a filibuster or artificial limits on passage, but an important vote — on this resolution.

“Along with the Americans we were sent there to represent, countries, businesses, and proliferation networks seeking to expand ties with Iran stand to have simple question answered: Does the Senate disapprove of this deal with Iran? The Senate should not hide behind procedural obfuscation to shield the President or our individual views. . . . I call on every Senator to resist attempts to obstruct a final vote and deny the American people and Congress the say they deserve on this important issue.

He continued, “The facts have already led many of our Democratic colleagues – including the top Democrats on the foreign affairs committees in both the House and Senate, as well as the presumptive leader of the party in the Senate – to come out in opposition to it. I know these were not easy decisions for them.

“But these Democrats are joined in their skepticism by Americans of every political persuasion who believe this deal will make our country less safe. Even those lawmakers that have come out in favor of the President’s agreement use terms like ‘deeply flawed’ to describe it.”

Indeed, some Democrats announcing their support for the deal have harshly criticized the Nuke deal as “deeply flawed” (Sen. Cory Booker [D-NJ]) and having “significant shortcomings” (Sen. Jeff Merkley [D-OR]).Sen. Booker said, “We joined with our partner nations at the outset of negotiations with the stated intention of preventing Iran from having the capability to get a nuclear weapon. Unfortunately, it's clear we didn't achieve that objective and have only delayed—not blocked—Iran's potential nuclear breakout.”

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) agrees: “This agreement – at best – freezes Iran's nuclear enrichment program - it does not dismantle or destroy it as I hoped it would.” He also said, “I have a number of serious concerns based on Iran's past behavior of cheating on nuclear agreements and our experiences trying to block other countries from developing nuclear weapons. . . . I have deep concern about the scope and implications of Iran's permitted centrifuge development program after ten years and its nuclear enrichment capacity after fifteen years.” So does Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR): “Critics are right that this agreement requires Iran's leaders to freeze many activities rather than completely destroy or dismantle their nuclear infrastructure, as I and others had called for.” He also said, “This agreement with the duplicitous and untrustworthy Iranian regime falls short of what I had envisioned.”

Sen. Gary Peters (D-MI) said, “This deal allows Iran, under the same leadership that refers to the United States as the Great Satan and calls for the destruction of Israel, to enrich uranium on its own soil. This core concession is in many ways a stark departure from our country's past non-proliferation policies, and it concerns me that this agreement could set a dangerous precedent . . . . I remain extremely concerned that after fifteen years, the restrictions on how much uranium Iran can enrich and to what level expire.”

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) said, “There are legitimate and serious concerns about this deal. For example, I would have liked to see a period shorter than 24 days to resolve disputes over access for inspectors. The U.N. embargoes on the sales of arms and ballistic weapons to Iran should have remained in place permanently, instead of lapsing after five and eight years. Hostages remain in Iranian custody.”

Explaining the “significant shortcomings” of the deal, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) said, “It does not block Iran's importation of conventional arms, allowing Iran to acquire conventional arms after 5 years and ballistic missile technology after 8 years. It does not dictate how Iran can spend the dollars it reclaims from cash assets that are currently frozen. It does not permanently maintain bright lines on Iran's nuclear research or nuclear energy program . . . .”

Sen. Wyden added, “Critics are also right that the Iranian regime will undoubtedly look to push the limits of this agreement. Given the nature of the Iranian regime and its history on this issue, the U.S. must be ready for Iran to attempt to violate its commitments in large and small ways.”

And Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) lamented, “This deal is not the agreement I have long sought.” And declared, “This is not the agreement I would have accepted at the negotiating table.”And these are the Democrats who say they will support the deal! If a Republican president had sold out America and Israel and other mid-Eastern allies as President Obama and Sec. John Kerry are proposing, these same democrat Senators would be leading the charge to vote against this faux treaty. Why are they willing to make "Iran stronger" and a "greater threat not only in their region but with future ICBMs which can reach America, "The Great Satan"?

Do the Democrats even care about their constituents and the rest of the American people when it comes to their survival and the survival of the unites States? Democrats should think carefully about whether they really want to follow the Obama White House’s request to filibuster this disapproval resolution and prevent an up-or-down vote.

If these Senators do not awake from their lethargic march to the tune of the Pied Piper, what we will soon experience is the utter failure of statesmanship and partisan politicians ignoring the need of our country's very survival. Iran's future development of ICBM missiles will not be to hit their neighbor Israel; it will be to reign down "hell-fire" on the so-called "Great Satan" - the United States of America.

None may "Dare call It Treason" today, but if our Senators and Representatives do not stop this #BadIranDeal, it will be seen by future Generations as the "Great Treason" when past elected lemmings enabled the future destruction of America.

---

Tags: Today In Washington, Congress back in session, Iran Nuke Deal, #badIranDeal, Great Treason To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!