Why President Trump must put a hold on the Obama nuke deal with Iran


#1

Why? Because under our Constitution Obama did not have authority to make such a deal without our Senate’s approval. The only lawful way for the “deal”, which in effect is a “treaty”, to stand is to gain the consent of our Senate. Therefore, President Trump needs to put a hold on the deal until the Senate of the United States gives its consent ___ consent which Obama failed to obtain.


In discussing this issue, it is important to note a fundamental rule of constitutional construction:


16 Am Jur 2d Constitutional law
Meaning of Language
Ordinary meaning, generally


”Words or terms used in a constitution, being dependent on ratification by the people voting upon it, must be understood in the sense most obvious to the common understanding at the time of its adoption…”__ (my emphasis)


So, in determining if Obama’s deal with a terrorist government is a treaty, we must determine what the meaning of a treaty is as expressed by our forefathers during the time of our Constitution’s framing and ratification process.


In Federalist No. 64 John Jay defines a treaty as a “bargain” . He writes:


”These gentlemen would do well to reflect that a treaty is only another name for a bargain, and that it would be impossible to find a nation who would make any bargain with us, which should be binding on them ABSOLUTELY, but on us only so long and so far as we may think proper to be bound by it.”


And in Federalist No. 75 Hamilton tells us with reference to a treaty, “Its objects are CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law…” And he goes on to explain why the president was not granted an arbitrary power to make “CONTRACTS with foreign nations, which have the force of law” unless approved by a two thirds vote. Hamilton points out the president, if he had such power:


“might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”


And James Wilson, who attended the Convention of 1787 says the following during the Pennsylvania Ratifying Convention:


“Treaties, sir, are truly contracts, or compacts, between the different states, nations, or princes, who find it convenient or necessary to enter into them.” ___ 11 Dec. 1787 Elliot 2:505--7


And our very own Supreme Court, in FOSTER v. NEILSON, (1829) Chief Justice Marshall says:


“A treaty is in its nature a contract between two nations, not a legislative act”.


Now that we know what a treaty is, as expressed by our forefathers and our very own Supreme Court, what Presidential power was Obama acting under when making a deal with a foreign government?


The President “… shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur…”


To pretend Obama had power to make a deal with Iran’s terrorist government without the consent of our Senate is a nefarious and outright lie, and an attempted subjugation of our written Constitution.


Keep in mind what Hamilton warns, which is especially applicable to Obama and why a two thirds vote is required:


Obama “might sometimes be under temptations to sacrifice his duty to his interest, which it would require superlative virtue to withstand. An avaricious man might be tempted to betray the interests of the state to the acquisition of wealth. An ambitious man might make his own aggrandizement, by the aid of a foreign power, the price of his treachery to his constituents. The history of human conduct does not warrant that exalted opinion of human virtue which would make it wise in a nation to commit interests of so delicate and momentous a kind, as those which concern its intercourse with the rest of the world, to the sole disposal of a magistrate created and circumstanced as would be a President of the United States.”


SOLUTION


President Trump needs to point out Obama’s “deal” never had the force of law under our Constitution; that he cannot in good conscious honor the deal and be faithful to his oath of office; and that he has decided to send the deal to the Senate for its consent or rejection, which is the step which Obama refused to take and makes the “deal” null and void.



JWK


"The Constitution is the act of the people, speaking in their original character, and defining the permanent conditions of the social alliance; and there can be no doubt on the point with us, that every act of the legislative power contrary to the true intent and meaning of the Constitution, is absolutely null and void. ___ Chancellor James Kent, in his Commentaries on American Law


#2

Obama, that sez it all IMO. He belongs in prison for TREASON, he did more to empower and fund the radical Muslims than anyone else has. Not only did Obama give Iran a nuke, but he paid them to develop it. The fact that he was ever elected at all tells me the state of America, the fact that he was elected twice only shows how far we have fallen from grace and the fact that he could have been elected 3x had he chose to run tells me we have not hit bottom yet.

Like a good soldier I watch my enemy. So I have data feeds from an amazing array of sources, not all of them savory. There appears to be a growing movement to get Obama to run again for POTUS. 2 ways they seem to think that he can get in. Overwhelming vote by the people thru a write in and or in some states like Kali, will just put him on the ballot anyhow. The other and most hoped for is the growing movement to change/rewrite the Constitution. I saw this in the 60’s when it was a laugh, today its far more serious as its being sold as 'we need a “LIVING” Constitution in order to meet the needs of the people in the 21st Century and to insure we strip out any signs of racism that are NOW found in the founding docs…they started with the monuments and its rolling hard and fast.


#3

The Obama nuke deal with Iran violates existing treaty law

Let us not forget that that Obama's nuke deal with Iran also violates existing treaty law!


Obama’s deal violates the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1970, which was extended indefinitely in 1995, in that that the U.S. may not assist Iran in any way to acquire nuclear weapons, or allow Iran to engage in activities to acquire nuclear weapons INDEFINITELY! See: How the Iran deal violates the Constitution



”The nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligates its nuclear-weapon State Parties “…not in any way to assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon State to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices, or control over such weapons or explosive devices.” The U.S. officially ratified the NPT on 5 March, 1970 and remains a party to this treaty currently. This means that the NPT is the Law of the Land. That the JCPOA’s provisions explicitly obligate the U.S. to both “assist” and “encourage” (not to mention “defend”) the Iranian regime’s nuclear weapons program is thus a direct violation of the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause (Article VI).


On 11 May 1995, the Treaty was extended indefinitely—meaning that the U.S. may not assist Iran in any way to acquire nuclear weapons, nor may Iran engage in activities to acquire nuclear weapons. Indefinitely. Not just for 8 years, or 10 years, or 15 years.”




JWK




Without our Fifth Column Media, Loretta Lynch and a corrupted FBI, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary