Writing in the February 4th edition of WorldNetDaily.com, historian Andrew Bostom, M.D. presents us some very hard truth:
Three of the GOP contenders for the 2016 presidential nomination looked the other way when the Constitution’s Senatorial Advice and Consent responsibility presented itself in the form of President Obama’s Iranian nuclear weapons development deal. Dr. Bostom posits that, having shirked this solemn responsibility on a matter of grave national interest, none of the three is deserving of consideration to hold the office of the presidency. With a few of my editorial comments and bold print emphasis included, here are some salient pieces of Andy’s brilliant essay, which I encourage all who follow this blog to read in its entirety:
By Andrew Bostom
By voting for the Corker-Cardin amendment, S.615, “Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015,” all three Republican senators running for president – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul (who just “suspended” his presidential campaign) and Marco Rubio – relinquished their constitutional authority to manage one of the most important global security matters of our time.
Back in March of 2015 I supported the only member of the Senate who served in both Iraq and Afghanistan, Sen. Tom Cotton, and his March 9, 2015, “Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Cotton’s letter, endorsed by 46 other GOP senators, informed the theocratic totalitarians of Iran – and reminded U.S. citizens – that, “In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote.” Commendably, and consistent with the “advice and consent” power of the Senate, Sens. Cruz, Paul and Rubio, co-signed Sen. Cotton’s letter. As signatories to the Cotton letter, these senators and presidential aspirants were cognizant – then – of the anti-constitutional Obama administration approach to such a dangerously destabilizing nuclear “agreement,” shorn of senatorial review and debate, and mandatory two-thirds approval vote by that august body.
The subsequent months leading to eventual passage of the Corker-Cardin senatorial “oversight” bill, and eventual approval of the Obama administration’s agreement with Iran, however, were punctuated by ignoble, capitulatory actions on the part of Sens. Cruz, Paul and Rubio. I maintain this shared sacrifice of one their most sacred constitutional duties as senators – advice and consent – disqualifies each of them from consideration as worthy presidential candidates.
April 14, 2015, a much ballyhooed “compromise” – but in fact a constitutional capitulation – regarding S.615 was unanimously agreed upon within the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The next day, April 15, 2015, I reported my worst fears about what had actually transpired, citing p. 32 of the updated bill, under a section entitled, “EFFECT OF CONGRESSIONAL ACTION WITH RESPECT TO NUCLEAR AGREEMENTS WITH IRAN,” which states in lines 16-19:
16”(C) this section does not require a vote by
17 Congress for the agreement to commence;
18 ”(D) this section provides for congressional
19 review …”…
…April 28, 2014, in a belated, rather feeble effort to restore constitutional advice and consent, as the Cotton/ the GOP-47 letter emphasized a mere seven weeks earlier, Sen. Ron Johnson proposed an amendment to the Corker Cardin Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, “To declare that any agreement reached by the President relating to the nuclear program of Iran is deemed a treaty that is subject to the advice and consent of the Senate.”… Sen Cotton, of course, voted to approve the amendment. To his credit, Sen. Paul voted “yea” as well. But the two other Republican presidential candidates, Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, did not even vote on the amendment…
At this point, as Andy tells us, Ted Cruz said one thing – then did another:
The next day, in a Washington Times op-ed, April 29, 2015, Sen. Ted Cruz observed, appositely:
“Thus, Corker-Cardin motion of disapproval reverses the ordinary presumptions. Instead of the President needing 67 Senate votes to ratify the Iran deal, it would now require 67 votes to stop an Iran deal. This makes no sense.”
Less than a week later, Wednesday, May 6, 2015, Cruz redoubled his criticism of Corker Cardin, calling it a “bad bill.” Cruz added that legislation, “is unlikely to stop a bad Iran deal … this issue [the Iran nuke deal] is far too important to send a bad bill simply to send a message. This legislation at best will slow down slightly a terrible deal. Don’t have a fig leaf vote.”
But the very next day, May 7, 2015, while brave Sen. Cotton alone held fast to principle, Sen. Cruz joined the rest of the senatorial lemmings, including Rubio and Paul, all three disavowing their constitutional responsibility, and voting 98 to 1 to approve the shameful Corker-Cardin capitulation.
Dr. Bostom writes that Senator Cotton, still the Lone Ranger in the forthcoming Iran nuke deal disaster said this:
…“A nuclear-arms agreement with any adversary – especially the terror-sponsoring, Islamist Iranian regime – should be submitted as a treaty and obtain a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate as required by the Constitution.”…
Ah, yes. As required by the Constitution. What a quaint, archaic idea that is.
The indictment, the devastating blow, Andy then presents is this:
Senate Republicans, most notably GOP presidential contenders Cruz and Rubio, shirked their constitutional and moral responsibility, to avoid confronting the implications of Iran’s religiously inspired bellicosity…
Dr. Bostom lastly informs us that in November of 2015, also sprach Senator Marco Rubio, the currently rising Gang of Eight conspirator, the media-darling-star, in the ongoing GOP battle for the nomination:
“I have always taken seriously my ‘advice and consent’ role in the Senate.”