« Hillary Campaign Fakery and E-mail Destruction | Main | Fort Hood Victims Will Finally Get Their Long Denied Benefits »
April 16, 2015
Mark Levin: ‘US Senate Just Capitulated to Obama,’ and Rewrote the Constitution's Treaty Provision
Mark Levin: ‘US Senate Just Capitulated to Obama,’ and Rewrote the Constitution's Treaty Provision
Nationally syndicated radio show host Mark Levin called out Senator Corker and the Republican-led Senate yesterday saying, “the United States Senate just capitulated to Obama,” and “just rewrote the treaty provision of the Constitution.”
Mark Levin exposes the treachery in the US Senate today, who he says just capitulated completely to Obama by gutting their own constitutional duty to approve treaties, giving it solely to Obama. So in short, Obama can make a treaty with the Islamo-Nazis in Iran without submitting it to the Senate and the Senate can only stop it if they can get enough nays to vote against it.
“Well, the United States Senate,” scolded Mark Levin, “just capitulated to Obama, and don’t believe anything else. And I’ll explain it, why in just a moment.”
Levin then, following his intro, chastised the Republican-led Senate again saying, “United States Senate, just rewrote the treaty provision of the Constitution.”
“It just rewrote the treaty provision of the Constitution,” Levin continued, “which is what I talk about all the time, how these people in Washington D.C. usurp the Constitution all the time.”
“And, you know, when I talk about an Article V convention of the states – ‘Oh, we’re gonna have a runaway convention. Oh, this that and the other. Don’t you support the constitution?’ Levin mocked. “And this may be over the heads of most commentators and people on TV and radio, but it’s not over my head and it won’t be over yours.”
“The treaty provision of the Constitution, Article I, Section 2, Clause 2, could not be clearer,” said Levin. “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, provided two thirds of the senators present concur. That is, they either vote it up or vote it down. It’s a super majority of senators present.”
“Now why did they do that?” asked Levin. “Well Alexander Hamilton tells us why they did it in Federalist 75, as I’ve talked about since last summer:
“‘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.’"
“This crucial power must not belong to one man, to a president,” said Levin. “It must be shared. And Hamilton went on to point out:
“‘Though it would be imprudent to confide in him solely so important a trust,’ [talking to the president,] ‘yet it cannot be doubted that his participation would materially add to the safety of the society. It must indeed be clear to a demonstration that the joint possession of the power in question, by the President and Senate, would afford a greater prospect of security, than the separate possession of it by either of them.’”
So it’s a dual obligation, stated Levin, “by the men who created these bodies and the federal government in the first instance. And yet, Bob Corker, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is walking around today like a rooster. Great accomplishment, even got Barbara Boxer to vote for it. To vote for what? To vote for what?”
Levin went on, “You see ladies and gentlemen, the way it’s supposed to work, something this momentous, something this crucial in changing the relationship, quote unquote, between the United States and Iran requires more than an executive action. It requires more than a statute. It certainly requires more than the UN. It requires a treaty – a treaty that the Senate can vote up or down, approve or disapprove. That’s the way the process is supposed to work.”
“But it won’t work in this instance,” said Levin, “for several reasons:
“Number one – You see in the last weeks, this phony framework, where Obama, our supreme leader, and Iran’s supreme leader are saying two different things about the same framework. Our imperial lawless president and their Islamo-nazi leader can’t even agree on what they supposedly agreed on. That’s number one.
“Number two – Your United States Senate, with a majority of Republicans, 54 Republicans, ‘Vote us in. Vote us in. We’ll repeal Obamacare.’ They didn’t. ‘We’ll cut spending.’ They didn’t. ‘We’ll secure the border.’ They won’t. ‘Oh, now what we need is a president.’ What? ‘Jeb Bush.’ Your Republican senate has utterly and completely capitulated. I don’t care if it’s unanimous or not.”
Now, as best as we can tell right now, this, this deal with this Corker, and Lindsey Graham I might add, Congress gets to review the deal for 30 days after June 30, and unless Congress rejects it, requiring 60 votes upfront and 67 to override a presidential veto – 60 votes upfront to overcome a filibuster,” stated Levin. “Obama can lift sanctions any time after that 30-day period.”
“So, we’ve turned the treaty provision on its head,” said Levin. “Instead of requiring two thirds of the senators present to approve the treaty, this bill explicitly – with Obama’s blessing, he’s pretending that, ‘Oh, I’m not that comfortable, but I’ll take it.’ – that you need 67 votes to override a presidential veto, to undo what Obama’s done.”
“Am I making sense Mr. Producer?” asked Levin. “Are you able to follow this?”
“Alright,” Levin continued. “So it’s been turned around. It’s been turned on its head. Now we need a supermajority to override the president, rather than a supermajority, where the president needs approval for a treaty.”
“The Republican Senate,” chided Levin, “has no more respect and faith for our Constitution than the Democrat president. They’re in it together.”
Wild Thing's comment.............
Mark Levin is so good. I am so glad he explained all of this. It is horrible what they are doing.
Posted by Wild Thing at April 16, 2015 12:55 AM
Comments
How can they do that when the Constitution is clear on what it takes to approve a treaty? Hate to say it folks but we're no longer a Constitutional Republic. We need a third party. A political party that will adhere to the Constitution of the United States.
Posted by: BobF at April 16, 2015 07:47 AM
Hillary as president will be a guarantee the The US Constitution goes the route of the Golden Fleece.
We are also in dire need of removing Boehner and McConnell.
Posted by: TomR,armed in Texas at April 16, 2015 09:29 PM
