US Democrats deplore Republican letter to Tehran on nuke talks

[webfact]

Democrats deplore Republican letter to Tehran on nuke talks
By DEB RIECHMANN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate Democrats said Tuesday that the GOP letter about nuclear talks with Iran undercuts the U.S. at the negotiating table and threatens to torpedo bipartisanship on Capitol Hill when it comes to the delicate issue of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also weighed in, saying Republicans were either trying to help the Iranians or hurt President Barack Obama.

As negotiators rush to reach an accord with Iran by the end of the month, partisan bickering continued on Capitol Hill, prompting Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to ask, rhetorically: "Is the Senate capable of tackling challenging national security questions in a mature and responsible way?"

Kaine said the letter freshman Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., wrote to the leaders of Iran amounted to a partisan "sideshow."

The letter, signed by 47 of the Senate's 54 Republicans, including members of the leadership and potential presidential candidates, warned that unless Congress approved it, any nuclear deal they cut with Obama could expire the minute he leaves office.

The U.S. and five other nations are working to craft an agreement that would prevent Iran from being able to develop nuclear weapons. Tehran insists its nuclear work is peaceful. Republicans worry that Iran is not negotiating in good faith and that a deal would be insufficient and unenforceable, allowing Iran to eventually become a nuclear-armed state.

Cotton denied undermining Obama's negotiating position. Appearing on MSNBC, he said, "We're making sure that Iran's leaders understand that if Congress doesn't approve a deal, Congress won't accept a deal." He accused Iran of seeking "a nuclear umbrella so they can continue to export terrorism around the world."

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif was quoted by the website of Iranian state TV on Tuesday as saying the letter's warning that any nuclear deal could be scrapped once Obama leaves office suggests the United States is "not trustworthy." He called the letter "unprecedented and undiplomatic." Earlier, he had dismissed it as a "propaganda ploy."

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell defended the letter.

"If there is not a deal, we've had some of our Democratic friends say the choice is between this deal and war," he told reporters. "No, the choice is between this deal and greater sanctions because we've finally discovered one thing that works."

In a news conference on another issue, Clinton wondered aloud about the purpose of the letter.

"There appear to be two logical answers: Either these senators were trying to be helpful to the Iranians or harmful to the commander in chief in the midst of high-stakes international diplomacy," Clinton said. "Either answer does discredit to the letter's signatories."

The signatories include a handful of Republican White House prospects, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, among them. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker issued statements suggesting their Senate colleagues were justified in sending the letter.

"The senators are reacting to reports of a bad deal that will likely enable Iran to become a nuclear state over time," Bush said.

Said Walker, "Unless the White House is prepared to submit the Iran deal it negotiates for congressional approval, the next president should not be bound" by it.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the GOP letter weakens the American position because it "shows division."

"Everything is done to attack," Feinstein said about Congress. "And that's not what our government should be."

In remarks on the Senate floor, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., pronounced the letter reckless, much as it would have been for U.S. lawmakers to "reach out to the Vietnamese" a generation ago. He said he hoped it would not cause the negotiations to fail.

Democrats didn't always agree with President George W. Bush's foreign policy decisions, but Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said he would have never contemplated writing such a letter when Bush was in office. "You can disagree and you can disagree without being disagreeable about issues," Nelson said.

Kaine spoke about what he called a "rigorously bipartisan" bill — authored by Republican Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee and Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez, the chairman and ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee — to allow Congress to review any final agreement with Iran.

Corker, one of seven Republicans who did not sign the letter, also lamented the discord.

"There are a lot of frustrations no doubt around the Iran issue and I hope we can move beyond some of the drama to focus, if there's a deal, on its content," Corker said. "But also to make sure that Congress has an appropriate role."
___

Associated Press writers Andrew Taylor, Alan Fram, Steve Peoples, Chuck Babington, Laurie Kellman and Donna Cassata contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-11

[snarky66]

I remember when Senator Barack Obama said that President George W Bush was unpatriotic for running up the debt. total hypocrite.

[lifeincnx]

As they seem to love a good war so much, should their intervening lead to a breakdown in diplomacy airdrop these 47 clown car politicians into Tehran so they can enjoy combat first hand. Complete party-line idiots.

[Ulysses G.]

"Unless the White House is prepared to submit the Iran deal it negotiates for congressional approval, the next president should not be bound by it."

That is it in a nutshell. Omama should not be allowed to let Iran to develop nuclear weapons like he was a dictator. The American system has checks and balances to prevent such criminal behavior.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[TVGerry]

No other president had been so disrespected before. It just goes to show how weak a president Obama is. Pathetic.

[Srikcir]

The Republicans are the ones who don't undestand the US Constitution nor a deal that they admit they know nothing about. Iranians must get a good laugh from that. Many Americans have long ago stopped laughing at Republican ignorance and destructive obstruction to any useful legislation - Obama will serve out two terms as POTUS much to the hatred of the GOP.

At least the letter will push the moderate Iranians towards concluding a deal with the P6 led by the US, if nothing else but to embarrass the Republicans and, by extension, Netanyahu. These Republicans also embarass themselves before the P5 nations (ie., Russia, China, France, Germany, and Britain) as being easily manipulated by Netanyahu.Obama might secretly be glad for the letter as a deal will give him political leverage on the domestic front.

[Pinot]

An unprecedented traitorous move by the Republicans. Not satisfied with trying to screw up the country domestically, withholding money to run the government (that worn out trick), they've gone international. These clowns are a disgrace. Bought and sold by Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers they have so poisoned the "Republican" brand at this point, there is no return.

And the comments above...absolutely clueless. The GOP is so poisoned with this relentless need to "get" Obama, they've completely lost it (not that they've ever had it).

The Republicans have now aligned themselves with the Iran hardliners who want no part of any peace treaty with Israel. Oy vey.

[wabothai]

Looks like a civil war between the democrats and republicans.

The Iranian answer to the republican letter is teaching a lesson.

Clearly shows the downfall of America.

Parallel to Thailand politics.

[Srikcir]

"Unless the White House is prepared to submit the Iran deal it negotiates for congressional approval, the next president should not be bound by it."

That is it in a nutshell. Omama should not be allowed to let Iran to develop nuclear weapons like he was a dictator. The American system has checks and balances to prevent such criminal behavior.

Please learn more about American Constitution and powers of the POTUS. A strong president also serves as part of the system of checks and balances. The next POTUS is bound by the agreement unless there is congressional action to overrule the agreement. Of course the next POTUS will be a Democrat so the entire discussion is only theoretical.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Srikcir

[Yann55]

Quote : prompting Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to ask, rhetorically: "Is the Senate capable of tackling challenging national security questions in a mature and responsible way?"

Corrected quote : prompting Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia to ask, rhetorically: "Is the Senate capable of tackling challenging national security questions anything in a mature and responsible way?"

Answer : no, it is not.

[lifeincnx]

"Unless the White House is prepared to submit the Iran deal it negotiates for congressional approval, the next president should not be bound by it."

That is it in a nutshell. Omama should not be allowed to let Iran to develop nuclear weapons like he was a dictator. The American system has checks and balances to prevent such criminal behavior.

Republicans are telling Iran, and, by extension the world, that any American president no longer has the power to conduct foreign policy, and foreign leaders should assume Congress could revoke American pledges at any moment. Once again a GOP-led Congress makes an ass of itself. Next, they'll be shutting down Government over this as the spirit of Newt Gingrich lives on.

[Chicog]

Tehran Tom has just told Fox "If you talk to most Iran experts, they'll tell you Iran does not understand our constitutional system".

What an enormous douche!

Zarif said he was astonished by the letter, saying it suggests the U.S. lawmakers "not only do not understand international law" — a subject in which he is a professor — "but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy," according to Iran's Foreign Ministry.

The Iranian minister said that "in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy."

Quite.

For a different perspective, Ailsa spoke to Richard Nephew, who was on U.S. teams negotiating with Iran during both the Bush and Obama administrations.

Nephew said, "The idea that a sitting group of senators of either party would write to the other side of a negotiation to say, 'Eh, don't sign a deal with these guys' — to me, it really smacks of a misplaced understanding of how the international system is supposed to work."

I look forward to seeing the academic achievements of Tehran Tom.....

The letter seemed to strike a nerve for Zarif, who moved to the U.S. as a teenager and holds a doctorate and two other advanced degrees from American universities.

[TVGerry]

GOP haters may curse them for doing this but let's be frank here, no other president, Republican or Democrat has been so weak as to let this happen to him. Shows what a clown Obama is and how much respect they have for him.

[howrub]

No other president had been so disrespected before. It just goes to show how weak a president Obama is. Pathetic.

I'm sorry. I have many disagreements with President Obama, but you are just plain wrong.

What it goes to show is just simply how many people feel comfortable disrespecting President Obama. And they do it because he is not white. We've had far weaker presidents, and none have been disrespected like this one. It is racism, pure and simple.

[KhnomKhnom]

Treason in Congress..... FBI needs to turn evidence over to courts and jail time is needed.

[chuckd]

An unprecedented traitorous move by the Republicans. Not satisfied with trying to screw up the country domestically, withholding money to run the government (that worn out trick), they've gone international. These clowns are a disgrace. Bought and sold by Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers they have so poisoned the "Republican" brand at this point, there is no return.

And the comments above...absolutely clueless. The GOP is so poisoned with this relentless need to "get" Obama, they've completely lost it (not that they've ever had it).

The Republicans have now aligned themselves with the Iran hardliners who want no part of any peace treaty with Israel. Oy vey.

You are correct in stating it is an unprecedented move by Republicans. However, it is hardly unprecedented by Democrats against Republican Presidents.

Here are five examples of Democrat intrusions into foreign affairs.

1. ..former Democratic Sen. John Tunney (Sen. Kennedy's confidant) in Moscow. Tunney asked the KGB to convey a message to Yuri Andropov, the Soviet leader, proposing a campaign in which Kennedy would visit Moscow to offer talking points to Andropov and Soviet officials on how to attack Reagan's policies to U.S. audiences."

2. In 1984, 10 Democratic lawmakers — including the then majority leader and House Intelligence Committee chairman – sent a letter to Nicaraguan Communist leader Daniel Ortega known as the "Dear Comandante" letter. In it, the lawmakers criticized Reagan's policy toward Nicaragua and whitewashed the record of violence by the Sandinista communists.

3. In 2007, newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. As the Associated Press reported at the time, "The meeting was an attempt to push the Bush administration to open a direct dialogue with Syria, a step that the White House has rejected."

4. In September 2002, David Bonior, the second-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, flew to Baghdad in an attempt to undermine George W. Bush's case for war in Iraq on a trip paid for by Saddam Hussein's regime.

5. On Nov. 20, 1990, as President George H.W. Bush gathered support to oppose Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait, the former Democratic President Jimmy Carter wrote a letter to nations who were in the U.N. Security Council trying to kill the administration's efforts.

Please spare us the faked liberal outrage.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/5-times-democrats-undermined-republican-presidents-with-foreign-governments/article/2561314

[chuckd]

"Unless the White House is prepared to submit the Iran deal it negotiates for congressional approval, the next president should not be bound by it."

That is it in a nutshell. Omama should not be allowed to let Iran to develop nuclear weapons like he was a dictator. The American system has checks and balances to prevent such criminal behavior.

Please learn more about American Constitution and powers of the POTUS. A strong president also serves as part of the system of checks and balances. The next POTUS is bound by the agreement unless there is congressional action to overrule the agreement. Of course the next POTUS will be a Democrat so the entire discussion is only theoretical.

Continuing in the theoretical vein...Executive Orders, Executive Memoranda and Executive Treaties do not bind a succeeding President.

He may overturn any or all of them issued by any predecessor President by issuing a new Presidential Order revoking them.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Presidential Revocation and Modification of Executive Orders

Executive orders are undoubtedly one of many tools available to Presidents to further policy goals during his Administration. By their very nature, however, executive orders lack stability, especially in the face of evolving presidential priorities. The President is free to revoke, modify, or supersede his own orders or those issued by a predecessor."

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS20846.pdf

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congressional action may also overrule an Executive Order. However those require Presidential approval and can be vetoed by the sitting President. Congressional action would be rather rare, if not impossible, in many cases.

[TVGerry]

No other president had been so disrespected before. It just goes to show how weak a president Obama is. Pathetic.

I'm sorry. I have many disagreements with President Obama, but you are just plain wrong.

What it goes to show is just simply how many people feel comfortable disrespecting President Obama. And they do it because he is not white. We've had far weaker presidents, and none have been disrespected like this one. It is racism, pure and simple.

I disagree. Many people dislike and disrespect Obama because he sucks as a president. But it's easy to say the people dislike him because he's black. Democrats and liberals would like people to believe that but that's not true. To them, it's easier to believe or spin that people who dislike Obama are racist rather than the fact that he's a crappy president.

[hard124get]

The Iranian minister showed how much ignorance and disregard Republicans have for International Law.

[Chicog]

An unprecedented traitorous move by the Republicans. Not satisfied with trying to screw up the country domestically, withholding money to run the government (that worn out trick), they've gone international. These clowns are a disgrace. Bought and sold by Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers they have so poisoned the "Republican" brand at this point, there is no return.

And the comments above...absolutely clueless. The GOP is so poisoned with this relentless need to "get" Obama, they've completely lost it (not that they've ever had it).

The Republicans have now aligned themselves with the Iran hardliners who want no part of any peace treaty with Israel. Oy vey.

You are correct in stating it is an unprecedented move by Republicans. However, it is hardly unprecedented by Democrats against Republican Presidents.

Here are five examples of Democrat intrusions into foreign affairs.

1. ..former Democratic Sen. John Tunney (Sen. Kennedy's confidant) in Moscow. Tunney asked the KGB to convey a message to Yuri Andropov, the Soviet leader, proposing a campaign in which Kennedy would visit Moscow to offer talking points to Andropov and Soviet officials on how to attack Reagan's policies to U.S. audiences."

2. In 1984, 10 Democratic lawmakers — including the then majority leader and House Intelligence Committee chairman – sent a letter to Nicaraguan Communist leader Daniel Ortega known as the "Dear Comandante" letter. In it, the lawmakers criticized Reagan's policy toward Nicaragua and whitewashed the record of violence by the Sandinista communists.

3. In 2007, newly elected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. As the Associated Press reported at the time, "The meeting was an attempt to push the Bush administration to open a direct dialogue with Syria, a step that the White House has rejected."

4. In September 2002, David Bonior, the second-ranking Democrat in the House of Representatives, flew to Baghdad in an attempt to undermine George W. Bush's case for war in Iraq on a trip paid for by Saddam Hussein's regime.

5. On Nov. 20, 1990, as President George H.W. Bush gathered support to oppose Iraq after its invasion of Kuwait, the former Democratic President Jimmy Carter wrote a letter to nations who were in the U.N. Security Council trying to kill the administration's efforts.

Please spare us the faked liberal outrage.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/5-times-democrats-undermined-republican-presidents-with-foreign-governments/article/2561314

No argument there. Some of those made themselves look stupid as well.

[Jai Dee]

One flame post has been removed from this thread.

[Publicus]

No other president had been so disrespected before. It just goes to show how weak a president Obama is. Pathetic.

I'm sorry. I have many disagreements with President Obama, but you are just plain wrong.

What it goes to show is just simply how many people feel comfortable disrespecting President Obama. And they do it because he is not white. We've had far weaker presidents, and none have been disrespected like this one. It is racism, pure and simple.

The post is worthy of being re-posted.

[Bangkok Herps]

GOP haters may curse them for doing this but let's be frank here, no other president, Republican or Democrat has been so weak as to let this happen to him. Shows what a clown Obama is and how much respect they have for him.

This mentality blows my mind. Republicans act disrespectfully...and that's Obama's fault?

Edited March 11, 2015 by Bangkok Herps

[TVGerry]

GOP haters may curse them for doing this but let's be frank here, no other president, Republican or Democrat has been so weak as to let this happen to him. Shows what a clown Obama is and how much respect they have for him.

This mentality blows my mind. Republicans act disrespectfully...and that's Obama's fault?

Obama hasn't earned respect yet. So why shouldn't his rivals treat him disrespectfully?

[Rancid]

This is pretty bizarre, no one with any credibility believes Iran is trying to build a bomb. Seems like Israel thru their lobbyists got their pet puppets all in a row to stir the pot yet again.

[ggt]

Democrats deplore Republicans because they exist...it is the Hatfields and McCoys played out in the halls of Congress and the Press...

[DeaconJohn]

Democrats deplore Republicans because they exist...it is the Hatfields and McCoys played out in the halls of Congress and the Press...

This letter has nothing to do with any metaphor even remotely connected with the Hatfields and McCoys.

It has to do with the influence of Netanyahu and the Israeli lobby in Washington.

[Jingthing]

This is pretty bizarre, no one with any credibility believes Iran is trying to build a bomb. Seems like Israel thru their lobbyists got their pet puppets all in a row to stir the pot yet again.

Actually, nobody with any credibility believes Iran is not trying to build a bomb. The only question for them is the price to be paid for going all the way and so far the high price has dissuaded them. But they sure intend to get as CLOSE as possible as soon as possible.

[Jingthing]

Looks like a civil war between the democrats and republicans.

The Iranian answer to the republican letter is teaching a lesson.

Clearly shows the downfall of America.

Parallel to Thailand politics.

You wish, huh?

It is not civil war.

It is not the downfall of America.

Nice try.

No cigar.

[Chicog]

Democrats deplore Republicans because they exist...it is the Hatfields and McCoys played out in the halls of Congress and the Press...

This letter has nothing to do with any metaphor even remotely connected with the Hatfields and McCoys.

It has to do with the influence of Netanyahu and the Israeli lobby in Washington.

Actually is it part of the consistent and tiresome GOP campaign to try and sabotage just about anything that Obama tries to do - or take credit for it when it succeeds.

If the negotiations are successful, they'll point at this letter as being pivotal in the process.