The Constitution can be SUCH a pain.

John Kerry admits: Iran deal isn't in treaty form because it would never be ratified by Congress


By —— Bio and Archives August 3, 2015

Comments | Print Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us

If you’re looking for someone who will admit what the left thinks, but usually doesn’t say, John Kerry might be your new best friend. Last week, we saw him testify that his nuclear deal with Iran would most likely lead to the deaths of American citizens. It was a disgusting, and probably treasonous, moment. It was also just the beginning of Kerry’s revelations.

According to everyone’s favorite Secretary of State, the Iran deal isn’t being presented as a treaty because the administration is well aware that no sane person would ratify it.

As radio host Jerry Bader wrote for Right Wisconsin, Kerry admitted as much while being questioned by Rep. Reid Ribble:

Ribble asked Kerry why the deal with Iran wasn’t in treaty form. To anyone paying attention, Kerry’s answer should have been a stunner:

  Congressman Ribble: “Thank you, Secretary Kerry, earlier in the hearing today you said that if the Congress rejects the deal, countries in the future will not trust negotiating with the U.S. State Department because they are now negotiating with 535 individual Members of Congress. For 228 years, the Constitution provided a way out of that mess by allowing treaties with the advice and consent of 67 US Senators. Why is this not considered a treaty?

  Secretary Kerry: “Well Congressman, I spent quite a few years trying to get a lot of treaties through the United States Senate, and frankly it’s become physically impossible. That’s why. Because you can’t pass a treaty anymore and it’s become impossible to you know schedule, it’s become impossible to pass, and I sat their leading the charge on the Disabilities Treaty which failed to basically, ideology and politics. Sir, I think that’s the reason why.”

  As Ribble put it in a news release: Kerry admitted this matter should have been presented to the Senate as a treaty to be ratified but wasn’t because the administration knew the votes weren’t there.

Obama & Kerry knew Congress would never ratify a treaty which placed one of our staunchest enemies - the world’s foremost sponsor of terror - on a path to nuclear weapons. In this case, “Politics and ideology” could easily be called “separation of powers and checks and balances.” It’s a terrible deal, and no one who truly values their country would ever vote for it. It may be a pain if your heart is set on a deal which aids America’s enemies, but that’s how it’s supposed to work.

So, they decided to craft their deal in such a way that it could sidestep the Congressional treaty authorization. Yes, Congress gets a yes or no say on the matter, but - since a nuclear deal with Iran isn’t being called a treaty - a congressional “no” can be vetoed by the President. Policy, therefore, was dictated by politics.

Here’s a thought: Maybe - just maybe - if their deal wasn’t a disaster waiting to happen, they wouldn’t have to worry about Congress approving it. That way, they’d be on sturdier legal and political footing.

Of course, they don’t really care about legal footing.  That’s something else Kerry admitted. 

Rep. Brad Sherman asked Kerry if the administration would follow the law, should the President’s veto be overridden.  You can view his answer in the video below but, if you think he says “yes we will follow the law,” you’re in for a disappointment.


Robert Laurie -- Bio and Archives | Click to view Comments

Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by CainTV, which can be found at caintv.com

Be sure to “like” Robert Laurie over on Facebook and follow him on Twitter. You’ll be glad you did.