Tom Cotton vindicated- by Senate democrats!

By 105 Comments 4,640 views

TomCotton

Tom Cotton, whose “letter” informing Iran that any binding agreement between Iran and the US would have to be approved by Congress got the young Senator slandered as a “traitor.”

The President accused the GOP signees of the “letter” of “making cause” with the hardliners in Iran. The GOP Senators do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons while Obama is most willing to allow it.

You’ll note that I include “letter” within quotation marks. It’s because Tom Cotton never wrote a letter to Iran. He never sent a letter to Iran. Deroy Murdock:

Either through befuddlement or deceit, many of the Republicans’ detractors have echoed this gross inaccuracy.

– A Slate column by Fred Kaplan last Tuesday bore this sub-headline: “The letter 47 Republican senators sent to Iran is one of the most plainly stupid things a group of senators has ever done.”
– According to the Washington Post, “47 Republican senators sent a letter to leaders in Tehran saying that any agreement reached between Obama and Iran without the approval of Congress could be revoked by the next president.”
– A citizen petition posted on the White House’s public-participation webpage demands that the federal government “File charges of treason against the 47 Senators who sent letter to Iran.”
– No less a conservative luminary than Michael Reagan wrote in last Thursday’s Newsmax.com: “Those 47 Republican senators didn’t need to send a public letter to Tehran to remind the Iranians how America’s separation of powers works.”

Even Obama got into the act:

“You don’t diminish your office by taking a selfie. You do it by sending a poorly written letter to Iran.”

Yeah, you do, but we’ll get back to that later.

Cotton didn’t send anyone a letter.

“Because it was an open letter, it was not sent to Tehran but rather posted on Senator Cotton’s website and social-media accounts,” Caroline Rabbitt, Senator Cotton’s communications director, explained to me last week. Cotton & Co. never even dropped an envelope in the mail.

Ironically, democrats in Senate, while feigning all sorts of outrage, vindicate Cotton:

Even as the White House ramps up pressure on Congress to stay out of its negotiations with Iran on a nuclear agreement, Republicans are on the brink of veto-proof majorities for legislation that could undercut any deal.

And that support has held up even after the uproar last week over the GOP’s letter to Iranian leaders warning against an agreement.

Though several Democratic senators told POLITICO they were offended by the missive authored by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), none of them said it would cause them to drop their support for bills to impose new sanctions on Iran or give Congress review power over a nuclear deal.

Even someone smart enough to become a democrat Senator doesn’t seem to understand what Cotton did:

“The letter’s incredibly unfortunate and inappropriate,” said Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota…

Psst, Senator- it wasn’t a letter but you are doing the right thing.

Now back to Obama’s words.

“You don’t diminish your office by taking a selfie. You do it by sending a poorly written letter to Iran.”

When the President of the United States, who spends his mornings watching ESPN and his afternoons on the linx, who longs to exercise his comedic talents on late night talk shows and burns an ungodly amount of fuel and produces a gross amount of pollution solely for frivolity, makes completely stupid faces in selfies- yes it absolutely diminishes the office of the President of the United States.

Apparently Obama doesn’t know what a letter is either. I guess ESPN didn’t cover it. Senate democrats are going to vote with the “traitor.” Obama?

UPDATE

A comment from one of our readers reminds me of something. Obama accused the 47 GOP Senators of “making cause” with the Iranian hardliners. This is utter nonsense. The Iranian hardliners want a nuke. The GOP 47 do not want them to have a nuke. Obama does want them to have a nuke. It is Obama who is making cause with the Iranian hardliners.

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

105 Responses to “Tom Cotton vindicated- by Senate democrats!”

  1. 102

    Adam

    How exactly was Cotton “vindicated” according to this? I see no proof that says what the vindication was at all. Because let’s face it, Iran is working on getting the nuke, and that is either behind everyone’s back where it isn’t monitored at all, which is dangerous, or with the world watching, monitoring and in a little bit of control of their supplies of materials flowing in to build it, otherwise they build up an arsenal in secret and we are all taken by surprise one day when they just decide to use them on someone instead. And the constant reference to “it wasn’t a letter”, how do you put that out there? Is that your “vindication”? That it was not written out in the form or “Dear Iran, this is Senator Tom Cotton…..”? You are hanging up on the technicality of the word used to describe the document sent to Iran, whether that be an actual letter in proper form, or a memo, email or formal paper sent to the government of Iran and containing the signatures of members of the Senate, words were put to paper and sent off to the Iranian government, plain and simple, call it what you will but do not hang all the vindications and that everyone is wrong on exactly what they sent was called. The facts that they put in the document PERIOD were in correct, but you do not seem to like to point that out do you? Or hang up on an actual real fact? The President does have the ability to broker an agreement or treaty with another nation, the Senate is asked for the permission to do so, and as these talks were going on well before this Congress took their seats then their approval is not required to have these talks, their only duty is ratification or denial once the deal is made, the Senate website states: “The Senate does not ratify treaties—the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification. If the resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the United States and the foreign power(s).
    Most treaties submitted to the Senate have received its advice and consent to ratification. During its first 200 years, the Senate approved more than 1,500 treaties and rejected only 21. A number of these, including the Treaty of Versailles, were rejected twice. Most often, the Senate has simply not voted on treaties that its leadership deemed not to have sufficient support within the Senate for approval, and in general these treaties have eventually been withdrawn. At least 85 treaties were eventually withdrawn because the Senate never took final action on them. Treaties may also remain in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for extended periods, since treaties are not required to be resubmitted at the beginning of each new Congress. There have been instances in which treaties have lain dormant within the committee for years, even decades, without action being taken.”

  2. 103

    Redteam

    @Adam: You miss a lot, don’t you Adam?

    describe the document sent to Iran,

    There was no document sent to Iran. Only posted on a web site.

    words were put to paper and sent off to the Iranian government, plain and simple,

    Nope, missed again.

    “The Senate does not ratify treaties—the Senate approves or rejects a resolution of ratification.

    yeah, you got one thing correct so far. but if they don’t approve that resolution, then there is NO treaty.

    and rejected only 21.

    Most often, the Senate has simply not voted on treaties that its leadership deemed not to have sufficient support within the Senate for approval, and in general these treaties have eventually been withdrawn. At least 85 treaties were eventually withdrawn

    If the senate fails to even vote, you don’t consider that a rejection? Strange. It’s sure not approved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *