Yes, Virginia, there will be an Iran sanctions bill

[Jesus Malverde]

Bad news, White House: It looks like the Senate will push ahead with a legislative response to the Iran interim nuclear deal over your strenuous objections.

Good news, White House: The measure will most likely be so watered down that it will give President Barack Obama broad latitude to pursue his high-wire diplomatic effort to ensure Iran does not get a nuclear weapon.

And it won’t get voted on before January, at the earliest.

Lawmakers will act despite an aggressive campaign by the Obama administration, including a classified question-and-answer session on Iran Wednesday with Secretary of State John Kerry and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.

“If what we do next screws up the negotiations with the Iranians, then the Iranians weren’t serious about the negotiations,” one senator told Yahoo News after emerging from that closed-door briefing. The senator requested anonymity to discuss the still-fluid state of play in Congress.

Kerry, Obama’s point man on convincing lawmakers to hold their fire, declined to characterize the session. “We just had a good meeting,” he told reporters. Did he get his point across? “You should ask the senators,” he replied.

The senators were similarly tight-lipped.

http://news.yahoo.com/yes--virginia--there-will-be-an-iran-sanctions-bill-230558678.html

[Bandit]

1. If Obama doesn't want this to happen he has a veto pen.

I doubt seriously there would be an override..They need to let diplomacy play out..

[Jesus Malverde]

2. Gram claims to have enough for an override...nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Claims, in other words maybe.

Veto it Mr. President, VETO IT

[anti partisan]

6. I don't have much confidence

If 70+ Senators are committed to pushing it through, vetoing it could look very ugly for him and the Democratic Party.

[Bandit]

12. Why would Democrats want to sabatage Obama and his historic diplomatic efforts?

I think if ANY Democrats went along with this it would not bode well for them.

[anti partisan]

13. Not sure the extent of their commitment

76 did sign a letter endorsing more sanctions, which included nearly all Republicans and a split in the Democrats. This was a few months back, but even putting this bill to Obama's desk would look ugly.

[leftyohiolib]

3. why must we suffer these fools. there is no need for more sanctions right now

[anti partisan]

8. There is a strong need for NO more sanctions right now

But Congress knows where their bread is buttered.

[anti partisan]

5. MJ Rosenberg has some good stuff on what's really happening

http://mjayrosenberg.com/

The right-wing war lobby masquerading as pro-Israel just won't let this go. Rosenberg is constantly keeping his blog updated.

[Jesus Malverde]

7. Thanks and welcome to DU..nt

[Jefferson23]

9. Stupid, dangerous and short sighted...hold strong, Obama. n/t

[Xolodno]

10. There afraid...

...if this becomes a "Nixon goes to China" moment. Hence why they flipped over a handshake with Raul Castro. If Obama normalizes with either one of these countries, it adds to his Resume of:

1. Leading us out of the Great Recession.
2. Getting Bin Landen
3. Pulling the USA out of two unpopular wars.
4. Establishing a medical system that could lead to a Single Payer system.


....and they were essentially against all of this or refuse to give credit. Reagan's greatest political success didn't come while in office, it came after he was out. The Republican party was able to "invoke" Reagan's popularity to help them in several elections. This could occur with Obama.

There is no more appetite for war and big business running roughshod. Having an idol like Reagan to play off of for the Democratic Party will not go well for them....and they know it.

[spanone]

11. congressional warmongers will not be thwarted.