The Conservative Principle

[Buy1Sell2]

Reader---one thing to remember is that in The US, the executive branch is unitary------ie made up of one person---and that individual has the sole voice for establishing foreign policy. Most Libprogs fail to consider this.

Reader---the president of the US, whether Democrat, Republican or anything else, has the sole voice for establishing foreign policy. ---The president is the sole determinant of the direction of foreign policy and as such is the face of the nation. Libprogs just fail to get it. Just as they don't understand that the president does not answer to The House of Representatives. He answers to The People. The executive branch is unitary and the president has plenary power to direct foreign policy.

 

[constitutionman]

Reader---the president of the US, whether Democrat, Republican or anything else, has the sole voice for establishing foreign policy. ---The president is the sole determinant of the direction of foreign policy and as such is the face of the nation. Libprogs just fail to get it. Just as they don't understand that the president does not answer to The House of Representatives. He answers to The People. The executive branch is unitary and the president has plenary power to direct foreign policy.

Reader -----, ^^This Guy^^ is a lying sack of shit with no credibility, he claims he is a constitutional scholar but has not cited any of his publications to prove such claims. he is constantly wrong and incapable of articulating any of his points. above is another clear example of him acting in ignorance of the rudimentary and fundamental aspects of the US constitution.

 

[Cuddles]

I recommend not paying attention to polls that get released by major media outlets or players like Gallup or Quinnipiac. This admonition particularly applies to so called "impeachment" polls. These folks are heavily tilting their samples towards Democrats/Libprogs. They are in cahoots with The Left and are using polls to influence, rather than reflect, public opinion.

It's a bullshit poll that leads the witness every step of the way.

For example it asks:

"As you may know, Congress has begun an impeachment inquiry that could lead to Trump being removed from office. Do you think Congress should or should not have begun an impeachment inquiry of Trump? Do you feel that way strongly or somewhat?"

Ahhh no. Congress has NOT begun an impeachment inquiry. The democrats have and it has not been approved by a vote of Congress which is requirement when saying that is something that congress is doing versus just some congressmen.

So let's revise the question a little, shall we?

"As you may know, the democrats have begun an impeachment inquirty that has not been approved by a full vote of Congress. Do you believe that they should or should not seek approval of the full House before proceeding further?"

The Idiot Dems have really stepped in it now. They put the cart before the horse and now there is no easy way out. If they go forward with impeachment and lose, which they will, then Trump is strengthened.---- If they drop the impeachment, then Trump is strengthened. The majority of Americans believe that this is all political. The framers purposely intended impeachment to be non-political.

brutal:

 

[El OchoCinco]

Reader---the president of the US, whether Democrat, Republican or anything else, has the sole voice for establishing foreign policy. ---The president is the sole determinant of the direction of foreign policy and as such is the face of the nation. Libprogs just fail to get it. Just as they don't understand that the president does not answer to The House of Representatives. He answers to The People. The executive branch is unitary and the president has plenary power to direct foreign policy.

Let's see any President get a treaty done or engage in international commerce with other countries unilaterally.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Let's see any President get a treaty done or engage in international commerce with other countries unilaterally.

Simple. Just rename the treaty as a deal.

Can't get a Iran Nuclear Treaty done with Iran because there is not enough support?

No prob. It just becomes the Iran Nuclear Deal and the president just announces that it has been done.

Could happen, eh?

 

[Cuddles]

Simple. Just rename the treaty as a deal.

Can't get a Iran Nuclear Treaty done with Iran because there is not enough support?

No prob. It just becomes the Iran Nuclear Deal and the president just announces that it has been done.

Could happen, eh?

Under U.S. law the JCPOA is a non-binding political commitment.[151][152] According to the U.S. State Department, it specifically is not an executive agreement or a treaty.[153] There are widespread incorrect reports that it is an executive agreement.[154][155] In contrast to treaties, which require two-thirds of the Senate to consent to ratification, political commitments require no congressional approval, and are not legally binding as a matter of domestic law (although in some cases they may be binding on the U.S. as a matter of international law).[154][f]

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Under U.S. law the JCPOA is a non-binding political commitment.[151][152] According to the U.S. State Department, it specifically is not an executive agreement or a treaty.[153] There are widespread incorrect reports that it is an executive agreement.[154][155] In contrast to treaties, which require two-thirds of the Senate to consent to ratification, political commitments require no congressional approval, and are not legally binding as a matter of domestic law (although in some cases they may be binding on the U.S. as a matter of international law).[154][f]

Correct. And Mr. Ocho referred to a treaty and I gave an example of how to get around it when there is not enough support.

And correct again, "deals" are not treaties that are binding, so therefore Trump violated nothing in withdrawing from the Iran Deal.

Not sure why we needed you to confirm that but whatever.

 

[Cuddles]

Correct. And Mr. Ocho referred to a treaty and I gave an example of how to get around it when there is not enough support.

And correct again, "deals" are not treaties that are binding, so therefore Trump violated nothing in withdrawing from the Iran Deal.

Not sure why we needed you to confirm that but whatever.

Well, Ocho said that you need congress to ratify an international treaty. Otherwise you end up w/a toothless unenforceable, useless "deal" as you suggested. So Ocho's argument of needing congress to do foreign policy refutes what b1s2 spouts and is further reinforced by the example you bring up.

Which begs the question, did you bring it up in defense of b1s2's statement or?

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Well, Ocho said that you need congress to ratify an international treaty. Otherwise you end up w/a toothless unenforceable, useless "deal" as you suggested. So Ocho's argument of needing congress to do foreign policy refutes what b1s2 spouts and is further reinforced by the example you bring up.

Which begs the question, did you bring it up in defense of b1s2's statement or?

As I have said many times before, stick with your routine of posting links. The minute your try to think and post independently, it gets very goofy, very fast.

Not your thing. Stay with the scripts.

 

[El OchoCinco]

As I have said many times before, stick with your routine of posting links. The minute your try to think and post independently, it gets very goofy, very fast.

Not your thing. Stay with the scripts.

In other words, H4M is correct.