viewers refer to quote above. thank you.
Well, this is a bit of a trip down memory lane and water over the dam and I am not up for the full trip but just as a reminder the whole history of the Iran deal is bit more serpentine than you noted, although in your defense there is plenty of snakiness to note so it is hard to cover it all.
Part of the background, actually the essence of it, was that Obama did not have the votes for a treaty even though you referred to it as a treaty for shorthand. As you noted, even some key dems in his circle did not support it and he certainly did not have the votes to get it approved in the Senate. Thus there was no treaty as defined by the Constitution.
Obama deal with this by re-framing it as the "Iran Deal" rather than treaty. Yeh, as I said "serpentine." Thus he went forward with it as something allegedly approved and entered into by the United States and marketed it that way, even though it did not carry the weight and backing of a formal treaty. His thinking of course was that we would have a dem president during and after his term and, what the hey, they will not reverse it. That would take someone like Trump who could never get elected.
The price he paid for snaking around like that was that it left the next president with the power to pull the plug on it without senate approval and without having to make his case to anyone. It is messy business though. It requires the rest of the world to understand what I just said when they were still thinking treaty and it became a distinction without a difference. So I dont mind dinging Trump on this but Obama was the one that took us into snake village by misrepresenting the level of force and approval behind the deal.
