Iran Deal Could Be Void Without Inclusion Of Side Deals

There’s something very interesting in the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review act, beyond the notion that it turned the typical, and Constitutional, method of the Senate approving all treaties and deals on its head, and that it could be null and void since the agreement is very different from what the INAR was all about. It was never meant to deal, statutorily per the text, with things like weapons and ballistic missiles. But, for all its flaws and problems, there is something that it was meant to deal with, as Congressman Mike Pompano and constitutional litigator David B. Rivkin Jr note

A side agreement could void the Iran deal

The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, which requires the president to submit to Congress the nuclear agreement reached with Iran, represents an exceptional bipartisan congressional accommodation. Instead of submitting an agreement through the constitutionally proper mechanism — as a treaty requiring approval by a two-thirds majority in the Senate — the act enables President Obama to go forward with the deal unless Congress disapproves it by a veto-proof margin. Unfortunately, the president has not complied with the act, jeopardizing his ability to implement the agreement.

The act defines “agreement,” with exceptional precision, to include not only the agreement between Iran and six Western powers but also “any additional materials related thereto, including . . . side agreements, implementing materials, documents, and guidance, technical or other understandings, and any related agreements, whether entered into or implemented prior to the agreement or to be entered into or implemented in the future.” But the president has not given Congress a key side agreement between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This document describes how key questions about the past military dimensions of Iran’s nuclear program will be resolved, as well as the precise operational parameters of the verification regime to which Tehran will be subject. (WT-bold mine)

This omission has important legal consequences. At the heart of the act is a provision, negotiated between Congress and the White House, freezing the president’s ability to “waive, suspend, reduce, provide relief from, or otherwise limit the application of statutory sanctions with respect to Iran” while Congress is reviewing the agreement.

They go on to note that the president cannot take any action during the review process, but that process cannot start till Obama submits all information, including side deals, to Congress. Per Corker:

The president is prohibited from suspending, waiving or otherwise reducing congressional sanctions for up to 52 days after submitting the agreement to Congress. Following an initial review period of 30 days, the legislation includes an additional 12 days if Congress passes a bill and sends it to the president. If the president vetoes the legislation, Congress would have an additional 10 days to override a veto. If the deal is submitted between July 10 and September 7, the review period increases to up to 82 days (60 days plus 12 days for the president to veto and 10 more days for Congress to override a veto). During this period, Congress may hold hearings and approve, disapprove or take no action on the agreement. Passage of a joint resolution of disapproval (over a presidential veto) within the review period would permanently prevent the president from waiving or suspending the congressional sanctions.

What does all that mean? Nothing can happen until Obama submits all information, including side deals. Back to the original op-ed

Congress must now confront the grave issues of constitutional law prompted by the president’s failure to comply with his obligations under the act. This is not the first time this administration has disregarded clear statutory requirements, encroaching in the process upon Congress’s legislative and budgetary prerogatives. The fact that this has happened again in the context of a national security agreement vital to the United States and its allies makes the situation all the more serious.

Not that Obama will care in the least. The authors recommend that, if Obama fails to submit all material by the end of today, Congress should vote to register its view that Obama failed to comply with his obligations under INAR, a bill he himself signed.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Iran Deal Could Be Void Without Inclusion Of Side Deals »

Pause Hits 18 Years 8 Months

No matter how much Cult of Climastrology members want to Deny it, no matter how they want to create excuses, it’s real. Oh, and no matter how much Warmists want to attack the messenger, Christopher Monckton of Brenchley

(Watts Up With That?) One-third of Man’s entire influence on climate since the Industrial Revolution has occurred since January 1997. Yet for 224 months since then there has been no global warming at all (Fig. 1). With this month’s RSS temperature record, the Pause sets a new record at 18 years 8 months.

The hiatus period of 18 years 8 months is the farthest back one can go in the RSS satellite temperature record and still show a sub-zero trend. The start date is not cherry-picked: it is calculated. And the graph does not mean there is no such thing as global warming. Going back further shows a small warming rate.

Other data shows a slight, very, very slight, warming trend. Which, let’s face it, is to be expected during a Holocene warm period.

This data in no way means that warming hasn’t occurred, nor that more warming won’t happen in the future. What it does show is the complete failure of Warmists talking points and computer models. That is the point in showing this. Skeptics do not believe that there hasn’t been warming. They don’t believe that there can’t be more warming. Our debate is over causation, not warming. If, per, CoC talking points and computer models, the Modern Warm Period warming was mostly/solely caused by Mankind, there should not be any pauses. Nor would there be a need for all the excuses.

Oh, and Warmists would actually act like this is a crisis, taking extreme measures in their own lives, rather than demanding taxes and more and more Government control.

Read: Pause Hits 18 Years 8 Months »

If All You See…

…is an evil petroleum produced plastic helmet, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Last Tradition, with a post on Harry Reid confirming Dems will filibuster voting on Iran Deal.

It’s football week!

Read: If All You See… »

Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup

Happy Sunday! A great day in America. The Dodgers are up 7.5 over San Fran, the NFL starts this week, East Carolina beat Towson. This pinup is by Arnold Armitage, with a wee bit of help.

What is happening in Ye Olde Blogosphere? The Fine 15

  1. The Last Refuge covers Trump beating Hillary in the general election
  2. Ice Age Now wonders why Obama didn’t visit the growing Alaskan glaciers
  3. A View From The Beach discusses a matter of conscience
  4. American Power covers whether offensive speech should be banned
  5. Dakota Voice wonders if Christians are commanded to surrender to evil
  6. Director Blue discusses the real unemployment rates
  7. Fire Andrea Mitchell covers some wonderful #BlackLivesMatter supporters
  8. Flopping Aces has Minimum Wage Chickenhawks
  9. Free North Carolina notes the Blue State Exodus
  10. Jihad Watch debunks the religious equivalency fallacy
  11. Powerline wonders if God hates green energy
  12. White House Dossier thinks Debbie WS is totally classy
  13. The Daley Gator notes a jihadi proof rifle
  14. The First Street Journal covers when teens are smarter than adults
  15. And last, but not least, The Last Refuge explains his support of The Donald

As always, the full set of pinups can be seen in the Patriotic Pinup category, or over at my Gallery page. While we are on pinups, since it is that time of year, have you gotten your “Pinups for Vets” calendar yet? And don’t forget to check out what I declare to be our War on Women Rule 5 and linky luv posts and things that interest me

Don’t forget to check out all the other great material all the linked blogs have!

Anyone else have a link or hotty-fest going on? Let me know so I can add you to the list. (BTW, since someone asked, the reason I leave links for the previous week up (or you might see a *) is because they are place holders for later in the day or for next weeks. Easier than rewriting all the time. Also, the listing order has to do with how they are added over time, not how good a post is. I just copy and paste from the previous week, then edit. If you see one of the *’s, go ahead and check out the blog anyhow, see if there is an update. I cannot update with my Android during the day.

Read: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup »

Liberal World: Now That Kim Davis Is In Jail For Her Beliefs, What Say We Rethink Hobby Lobby?

On one hand, Kim Davis (who’s a Democratic Party voter, to be clear) should be lauded for standing by the force of her convictions in refusing to provide marriage licenses for gays. On the other hand, sometimes the duties and requirements of jobs change. We have a choice in complying with them, or leaving for a different job. It appears as if she could have simply allowed the other clerks to perform the marriages and do the paperwork.  That said, jail is foolish. They could have simply let her go. But, where, exactly, does the 1st Amendment start and end in this situation? That’s a much bigger discussion which is causing conniptions with even heavy duty legal scholars.

But, hey, remember, the Supreme Court’s decision on gay marriage is Settled Law! So say all sorts of Leftist activists. But, what of the Hobby Lobby decision?

Now that Kim Davis is in Jail, Let’s Re-Think Hobby Lobby

In a homophobic political stunt poorly veiled in “religious beliefs,” Rowan County, Kentucky clerk Kim Davis denied marriage licenses to LGBT couples despite a federal court order instructing her that the US Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, and she must comply. She claimed that issuing the licenses would be a violation of her “religious beliefs,” continued to defy the law, and is now in jail for contempt of court. However, when Hobby Lobby had contempt for the reproductive health rights of its female employees, the US Supreme Court ruled Hobby Lobby did not have to comply with the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate because doing so would violate the “religious beliefs” of Hobby Lobby, a “person.”

Interesting, in that the author, Sanjeev K. Sriram, refuses to acknowledge the true beliefs, and instead creates his own for these folks. It sure seems that Kim Davis has true religious beliefs: she went to jail over them. This is one of the things Progressives (nice fascists) like to do: impart different (and non-stated) viewpoints for situations that change the dialogue in their favor, viewpoints that don’t match what the original people say, allowing the Progressives to attack in a manner to force political change, especially when people like Kim Davis attempt to stand on their Constitutional Rights. Can’t have that, you know, not when Social Justice is at stake!

One person can dress up their homophobia in “religious belief” and be sent to jail, while another “person” can dress up misogyny in “religious belief” and receive the support of the highest court in the country. I know this is an oversimplification.

A vast oversimplification, and, again, telling us what these folks in question believe, in contradiction.

The reason I am making this argument on an editorial page and not in front of a judge is because I am appealing to my fellow Americans for whatever decency may exist in our court of public opinion.

Wait, I thought shaming and cyberbullying, along with real world bullying, was a bad thing? Oh, right, not when Social Justice is at stake. Then people can be abused to no end.

For these behaviors to be upheld in the case of Hobby Lobby and punished in the case of Kim Davis worsens discrimination by making it feel arbitrary: getting bullied by someone’s Bible is okay, but only sometimes?

Apparently, though, it’s OK to bully Kim Davis. Funny how that works. It’s not OK to bully gays for their beliefs, but, going after Kim Davis? A-OK. (It’s not OK to bully either, let’s be clear)

Women have a right to contraception under their basic human right to health care, and LGBT couples have a right to marriage under basic civil rights. None of these rights should be denied due to the whims of public or private authority’s “religious freedoms.” As Kim Davis sits in jail and Hobby Lobby enjoys “personhood,” both need to learn that disagreeing with someone’s rights does not entitle you to oppressing them.

A couple points. First, we can see the Progressive talking point about the “right to contraception” idiocy. No woman is actually being denied. Hobby Lobby never said once that the women who work for them cannot use it. They are just not going to pay for certain forms, nor for abortifacients and abortions. Progressive Social Justice Warriors will never admit that part. They must create a version where the big evil religiosity company is completely denying their female employees any and all contraception.

Why, exactly, must the company pay for a woman’s contraception? There’s no right to that anywhere within the Constitution. Nor was this “right” actually included in the Affordable Care Act. Contraception is not mentioned at all in Obamacare. The Contraception Mandate was wholly created by Health And Human Services out of thin air. Is food a human right? How about housing? We’ve been told they are. Perhaps companies should be forced to pay for those. Maybe they should be forced to pay for other things, too. Right?

They may have a “basic right”, but that doesn’t mean Someone Else should be forced to pay for it, especially when it interferes with the Rights of other people.

Second, oppression? Seriously? It’s oppression to be forced to pay $9 a month to buy your own birth control pills, and pay for your own abortions? It should be noted that Dr. Sriram is a pediatrician. He is the “Host of “Dr. America” on We Act Radio, pediatrician in Washington DC, member of the National Physicians Alliance.” A baby doctor. Yet, strangely, he is advocating for the killing of the unborn.

You might be saying “hey, he’s just one guy, one I’ve never even heard of.” Yet, you can bet the ranch that Progressives were totally agreeing with Dr. Sriram’s screed. They have no problem with forcing compliance, by law, with their beliefs, even if they violate the Constitution.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Liberal World: Now That Kim Davis Is In Jail For Her Beliefs, What Say We Rethink Hobby Lobby? »

If All You See….

…is a horrid fossil fueled vehicle, which No One Else should be allowed to drive, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The Lonely Conservative, with a post on Iran promising to set fire to US interests.

Read: If All You See…. »

Disgusting: Warmist Links Syrian Boy’s Death To “Climate Change”

Remember this from a few days ago?

https://twitter.com/MsIntervention/status/639164785955840000

Unhinged Warmist Fram Dimshaw makes the link, using the picture on the right to push his Cult

This is what a climate refugee looks like

A policeman tenderly scoops up the corpse of a small child on a desolate beach and within hours the image is an icon of grief and suffering around the world.

The child was three-year old Alan Kurdi, who fled with his family from Syria’s bloody civil war, joining millions of others seeking a new life abroad, victims of war, dictatorship, and a climate disaster that began nearly a decade ago.

“Some of you know the underlying story of what caused the gates of hell to open in Syria,” said former Vice President Al Gore in a speech he made on July 9 at Toronto’s Climate Summit of the Americas. “Our hearts are heavy when we even think about the tragedy in that land. From 2006 to 2010, [Syria] had a climate-related drought that destroyed 60 per cent of their farms and killed 80 per cent of their livestock and drove a million and a half climate refugees into the cities of Syria, where they collided with another million and a half refugees from the Iraq War, and the WikiLeaks disclosure of documents inside the Syrian government in that era show their discussion [of] ‘we can’t deal with this’.”

The rest of the article is about as stupid as you expect from a brain dead member of the Cult of Climastrology, ending with

But the strongest signal of all may yet be the image of a dead toddler on a desolate beach. An image of war – and a changing climate.

These people have absolutely no shame.

Let’s also not forget that these same people supported Obama ignoring the Arab Spring, and supported Obama/Clinton supporting Syrian leader Assad as a “reformer”.

Read: Disgusting: Warmist Links Syrian Boy’s Death To “Climate Change” »

Say, Why Is Science So Darned Straight?

Things That Are Important at the Paper Of Record, as brought to us in the opinion section by Manil Suri

Why Is Science So Straight?

MANY years ago, over lunch at our university cafeteria, I came out as gay to a colleague in the engineering department. “I didn’t realize you were so unconventional,” he said. I tried explaining to him that being gay was innate and had nothing to do with wanting to subvert convention, but he refused to retract his label. Looking back, perhaps he was correct.

For I had violated an unspoken convention of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics): the invisibility of its L.G.B.T. members. (snip)

The lack of visibility isn’t restricted to academia. My partner, a civil engineer, recalls meeting just two other gay engineers professionally, in a 35-year career.

Statistics are hard to come by, but an analysis by Erin Cech, a sociologist at Rice University, of federal employee surveys found 20 percent fewer L.G.B.T. workers in government STEM-related jobs than should be expected.

Underrepresentation is just one factor that reduces visibility. Unlike women and minorities, whose status is usually obvious, sexual orientation is a hidden characteristic. The fact that a sizable proportion of the L.G.B.T. STEM work force is closeted (43 percent, according to a 2015 estimate) further deepens this effect.

Hmm, it kinda sounds like people want to focus on work, and do not really care what one’s sexual orientation is.

An essential step is to break self-perpetuating patterns of concealment. Teachers must come out not just to colleagues, but to students — some of whom will need role models, and all of whom must get used to visible L.G.B.T. professionals to prepare for future workplace settings.

In other words, forcing others to share in your personal life in a work environment. Personally, I do not care if you’re gay, or like to cross-dress during your off hours. I’d be interested in things like the type of books you read, where you like to go on vacation, what kinds of TV shows and movies you watch, etc. I do not need to know things about your sexuality, and that applies to heterosexuals, too. But, hey, this isn’t about getting to know someone, it’s all about Social Justice And Stuff!

More critically, STEM culture must rein in the pressure to separate professional and personal identities. It should view its workers more holistically, welcoming their interests and differences as sources of enhanced resourcefulness.

See? Social Justice And Stuff. Turning work into a cocktail party, rather than, you know, work. Maybe people just want to work, to solve the problems they are paid to solve, to build the things they are paid to build, to discover the cures they are paid to discover? No, sorry, can’t have that! We must have a Discussion Of Importance on non-work related Issues!

This sort-of goes with the notion that Burning Man is very, very White. Founder Larry Harvey made some silly comments on the subject, but, really, it comes down to “maybe there are some things that Whites like to do that Blacks don’t”. Are we to force Blacks to attend Burning Man?

Read: Say, Why Is Science So Darned Straight? »

Hillary Is Totally Sorry You’re “Confused” About Her Email Scandal

See, it’s not really about the potential violations of federal law, including the Espionage Act. It’s not about her potentially exposing classified and sensitive government information, much less improperly handing the same. It’s not about the potential for the information to be hacked. Nor about the server being insecure. Nor using the server being a way to avoid oversight and freedom of information acts. And don’t even get her started on illegally wiping the server. Not, it’s all your problem

(NBC News) In an exclusive interview with NBC News/MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Friday, Hillary Clinton said she’s “sorry” there’s been so much controversy over her private email server, but declined to apologize for the decision to use it. She also suggested that GOP front-runner Donald Trump is unqualified to be president and weighed in on the surprisingly robust challenge to her candidacy from Democratic primary rival Bernie Sanders.

“At the end of the day, I am sorry that this has been confusing to people and has raised a lot of questions, but there are answers to all these questions,” Clinton said of her email server after being pressed by Mitchell on whether she should apologize for the controversy that has dogged her campaign from the outset. “And I take responsibility and it wasn’t the best choice.”

Those questions are so easy to answer that her tech support guy has told Congress he will plead the 5th to every question (which, really, is only viable if the answers would incriminate himself). But, hey, you’re confused! You just don’t understand, I guess, why Hillary would refuse to use the legally required State Department email address and system, along with approved devices.

She explained that she had used a personal email account as a senator from New York and didn’t spend much time considering alternatives when she became secretary of state in 2009. “I did all my business on my personal email [in the Senate],” Clinton said. “I was not thinking a lot when I got in [to the State Department]. There was so much work to be done. We had so many problems around the world. I didn’t really stop and think what kind of email system will there be.”

She wasn’t thinking  a lot. She didn’t stop and take the time to think. If this doesn’t make it into a Republican commercial hammering her, the GOP should give it up. Those kinds of comments do not exactly inspire confidence in her capabilities to be POTUS.

Anyhow, ignorance of the law is not an excuse, as the saying goes. Well, I once got away with doing 45 in a 35 because the speed limit sign was hidden behind a tree, and the previous section of the road was 45. But, hey, I wasn’t sending classified information on North Korea via insecure email in contradiction to the law, which she was supposed to be read in on when she took over State. She received briefings on What Is Allowed And What Is Not Allowed. She would have had people Telling Her These Things. She chose to ignore.

But, hey, this is all really you’re problem, you know.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Hillary Is Totally Sorry You’re “Confused” About Her Email Scandal »

We’re Saved: Warmists Record Song About Climate Change

But, not just any Cult of Climastrology member

(Star Tribune) Paul McCartney, Jon Bon Jovi, Sheryl Crow and Fergie have joined forces to record a song about climate change.

Sean Paul, Leona Lewis and Colbie Caillat also appear on “Love Song to the Earth,” which was released Friday on iTunes and Apple Music via Connect.

The song was created to support a U.N. conference in Paris this December that’s aimed at reaching a deal with more than 190 nations to keep global warming from reaching dangerous levels.

Good thing all these music folks aren’t using tons of fossil fuels and using lots of energy, eh?

Read: We’re Saved: Warmists Record Song About Climate Change »

Pirate's Cove