Schumer bucks White House on Iran - throws his weight behind legislation to reject a deal

[tracks29]

This has to hurt his chances at taking over for Reid

Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, one of Capitol Hill’s most influential voices in the Iran nuclear debate, is strongly endorsing passage of a law opposed by President Barack Obama that would give Congress an avenue to reject the White House-brokered framework unveiled last week.

The comments Monday by the Democratic leader-in-waiting illustrate the enormity of the task ahead for President Barack Obama and his team: While there’s no guarantee that Congress would ultimately reject an agreement with Iran, there’s an increasingly bipartisan consensus that Congress should at least have the ability to do so.

“This is a very serious issue that deserves careful consideration, and I expect to have a classified briefing in the near future. I strongly believe Congress should have the right to disapprove any agreement and I support the Corker bill which would allow that to occur,” Schumer said in an emailed statement to POLITICO.

Source: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/04/chuck-schumer-bucks-white-house-on-iran-116713.html

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

1. Oh fuck it then, lets have a world war

[Octafish]

55. It is starting to look that way.

Obama tries his best. Those with a different agenda are suspect.

[sabrina 1]

90. Obama can and should veto any bill this disgraceful Congress passes. He has stated that that is

his intention. I hope he sticks to it.

Shame on Schumer, who unfortunately is my Senator. I would write to tell him what I think, but he doesn't read his mail from mere constituents. Never, ever got even a computer generated acknowledgement from him.

I had the misfortune to meet him when he was a Congressman through my job, and he stands out among all the other Dem Politicians I met as the one I could not stand instantly.

He is arrogant, insecure, full of his own importance, unfriendly to the staff where he was a guest, and generally not liked by anyone who met him that day.

First impressions are often right. They certainly were in his case.

[MBS]

108. + 1000 n/t

[Octafish]

111. I liked what he said during Iran-Contra...

...but that turned out to be for show, just like during the Great Bankster Bailout.

Thank you for sharing, Sabrina. The guy's got an agenda and we're not really part of it -- the "who gets anything worth getting" part, anyway.

[blkmusclmachine]

2. Schumer is terrible. And that's saying something.

[Wellstone ruled]

67. Chuck the Smuck!!!

AIPAC's go to Boy.

[2banon]

71. in agreement

[merrily]

106. +1 And I am not referring to IP, either.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Is Schumer one of those "party loyalists" so popular around here?

[cantbeserious]

7. All Democrats Are Sacred - It Hath Been Writ In Stone

eom

[great white snark]

13. Well, he is a Democrat and that's never popular with the 3rd party squatters around here.

[rhett o rick]

42. Real Democrats recognize that all Democrats are not equal. Some Democrats

walk like a Republicon, and talk like a Republicon.

Anyone can call themselves a Democrat. Not everyone can be a Democrat.

[VanillaRhapsody]

65. Real Democrats dont say they wont vote for the winner of the Primary if a certain woman wins...

Not everyone who thinks they are ....are one!

[Dragonfli]

73. I am glad to see the head of the party is back.

Where ya been? I heard some people won't swear a blood oath to Hillary over every other Democrat, better get on that and let them know that they are no longer Democrats. They foolishly think they are because of trivial things like registering as such while believing in the party platform over those that think the platform is so much toilet paper, foolish Independents registered as Democrats, when will they learn your power?.

[rhett o rick]

82. Nice to see you enter the discussion. Real Democrats don't betray their Party and

bow down to Republicons. Not only kiss George Bush's feet, but help him sell the lies. HRC actually repeated the Bush lies and tried to convince honest Democrats to follow the Republicons. How many children died as a result. Died horrible deaths. That means something to me, doesn't it to you? If you hold Bush responsible, why don't you hold HRC responsible?

I consider myself a real Democrat and won't support anyone that is responsible for the deaths of 1 million people.

[VanillaRhapsody]

64. You said a MOUTHFUL!

[merrily]

107. I don't understand. Anyone who runs as (D) emocrat pretty much has to be a Dem Party

Loyalist, if he or she has any realistic interest in getting or remaining in political office.

[Jefferson23]

4. What else is new? n/t

[Egnever]

15. This ^^^

[Cha]

86. According to this and I hope it's true.. "US Congress like Bibi are irrelevant.."

Bobfr @Our4thEstate
Follow
What @SenSchumer (AIPAC/WallSt) doesn't get is #UNSC will eliminate sanctions if #Iran complies

US Congress, like Bibi, are irrelevant
@VP

4:31 PM - 6 Apr 2015 19 Retweets 3 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2015/04/06/the-week-in-toons-13/

I hope so!

[Gothmog]

113. Agreed

Sanctions will be lifted on Iran no matter what. If this deal fails, then China, Russia and a good percentage of Europe will be abandon the sanctions and Iran will be free to develop a bomb. President Obama and Sec. John Kerry have done an amazing job keeping sanctions in place this long

[Jefferson23]

115. That is what Obama may need to do, ultimately..in the end. I am not confident about

Schumer and he may not be alone. The politics of AIPAC and Schumers constituents
are problematic..they are hawks when it comes to Israel...foolishly so, unfortunately.

snip* What the White House is saying is that it’s open to Congress passing what’s essentially a non-binding resolution non-bindingly saying that Congress can non-bindingly review the agreement. This would allow Congress to have a pretend-say in an area where, if it had an actual say, it would probably screw it up, because Congress. Given the way some members in Congress have behaved in recent months, our first branch of government more than deserves to be condescended to in this Awww, we’ll figure out a wittle pwotest vote for you guys manner.
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/07/chuck_schumers_iran_betrayal_why_his_latest_shenanigans_could_give_obama_a_major_headache/

Obama needs the Democrats, I hope he gets more than enough or at worst, just enough.
If not, I doubt he will give in to them, he wants this deal and for it to have a lasting
impact. Why would Iran agree to have these Republican predators at their
back again if they can undo everything?

It's awful Cha, that any Democrat would push back against it, but as I said, the politics
is intense, has been for decades on this subject..the hawks are losing it..not having the boogeyman
Iran meme is a significant loss to them in their minds, seriously.

[Cha]

118. Shame on Schumer.. I hope Harry Reid decides he doesn't want him as the Minority Leader after all

SOS Kerry must be disgusted with Chuck Schumer as well as so many of us are.

Interesting article for you, Jefferson.. "#IranDeal: Sen. Schumer Steps up to Betray His Country and His
President", .. I'm just sick about it. Thank you for your link.. I so hope it doesn't mess up Peace.. at All!

snip//

This morning, when CNN had a moment between their breathless coverage of the Boston bomber trial (9,876,431 words to say "Jury deliberating&quot and their hard-on over Rand Paul's entry to the clown car known as the Republican presidential primary, they ran a quick headline that New York Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer has joined forced with Sen. John "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" McCain to propose legislation allowing Congress to scuttle the fantastically good Iran Deal now in its final stages of being written.

Schumer actually signed on last week as a cosponsor to Tennessee Republican Bob Corker's bill to allow Congress a "review" (read: veto) on any potential nuclear deal with Iran that would involve suspending Congressional sanctions. Corker never signed the infantile letter freshman Republican Tom Cotton and 46 other Republicans wrote to Iran, and now we know why: he was busy writing legislation to give shape to that temper tantrum. He, and apparently Schumer, weren't content with just treason talk, they wanted treason law.

But Schumer chose today - just as the White House is beginning a push for the deal that would put even weapons grade material - let alone a nuclear weapon - out of Iran's hands through stringent verification and monitoring requirements. Notably, Schumer's move comes on the heels of Israeli Prime Minister and fanatical Likud party leader - as well as noted racist - Bibi Netanyahu ripping the deal and lobbying the US Congress.

More..
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2015/4/7/senatorfromlikud-sen-schumer-iran-deal#.VSRxBLsGOZI.twitter

On the positive side..

Bipartisan Group of Over 50 Senior Military and Diplomatic Leaders Endorse Iran Deal Framework

Today, a bipartisan group of over 50 retired military officials, U.S. foreign policy leaders, ambassadors, and leading national security experts, released a statement applauding the announcement of the framework agreement reached by the P5+1 and Iran. This statement was released by The Iran Project.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-cirincione/bipartisan-group-of-over_b_7012994.html



http://theobamadiary.com/2015/04/07/first-lady-michelle-obama-honors-those-who-give-their-all-for-the-country/#comments

Here's to hoping the Iran Deal Prevails.

[Jefferson23]

119. Me too. The article on the Bipartisan 50, that is one heck of an endorsement. Although

the opposition doesn't want any deal, so it's really not about rational minds here, dominance
is what they're trying to secure. But it is going to be hard for them to argue against
that endorsement and they need to be pressed to explain themselves.

Thank you for that link, I had not seen it. I think Obama will succeed in the end,
he keeps pushing despite the wrenches they're trying to throw in. Politics can
be damn ugly but I believe he gets there.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. I am naive, but I still expect the deal to be endorsed by the Senate. n/t

[Renew Deal]

6. What I don't understand is whether the "disapproval" is binding.

Last edited Mon Apr 6, 2015, 08:11 PM - Edit history (1)

[Smithryee]

17. Since it is an agreement, not a treaty

Congress can't do shit about it.

Only the President can tear up an agreement, and it's not even finalized until at least June 30th anyway.

So Schumer is being a little premature..

[onecaliberal]

68. Constitutionally the congress can't do anything.

This isn't a treaty that needs to be ratified by Congress.

[Renew Deal]

69. So if they want a symbolic disapproval then it's meaningless.

[onecaliberal]

72. The optics are not meaningless.

Can you imagine if it were dems writing letters to Saddam telling him to ignore bush when bushco was lying us into Iraq. There were millions of us in the street.

The American people are overwhelmingly for the peace deal.

[Johonny]

8. If he is one of the most influential voices and the administration is igoring him

can we assume Capitol hill has no influential voices atm.

[LittleBlue]

9. Ignore congress. Get the deal passed by the UNSC. nt

[kelliekat44]

10. Three word: Israeli owned Congress! nt

[oberliner]

43. Everyone ought to take note of comments like this one

It's been seen on more than one occasion here.

[msongs]

77. and your problem with senators owned by any one particular lobbying group is....? nt

[2banon]

74. Damn near! And he's going to be the Democratic Senate Leader after Reid leaves. sheesh.

[onecaliberal]

11. Fuck schumer. This asshole cannot be allowed to take over for Harry.

He's a corporatist shill. I wish they would all pack their bags and head to the front of the war line.

We need to get rid of these fuckers in congress.

[tabasco]

63. Goddamn right. n/t

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. Schumer needs to be shown the door.

[onecaliberal]

83. Agree!

[Laurian]

12. I don't like Schumer. Ugh

He's always seemed very self absorbed to me more concerned about himself than anything else. I am angry but not surprised he would take this stance on the Iran deal. I would have preferred Durbin as Reid's successor. Oh well, another disappointment.

[ChiefJusticeIV]

14. Pathetic

It's real pathetic when Saudi Arabia is endorsing a deal with Iran and yet our own Congress can't.

[KamaAina]

16. When Insannity was on local radio in NYC, he called him "Upchucky Schumer"

He wasn't wrong.

[madville]

18. Corker said yesterday that he is up to 64 votes

In favor of his bill to give Congress some oversight.

Three more votes and they can override a veto.

[krawhitham]

19. What about the House? They would need 43 Dems votes

[madville]

25. That's not many as far as the House goes

Very doable I would bet, that's less than 25% of Democrats in the House.

[bravenak]

20. I do not like him.

[spanone]

21. chuck was there when bibi spoke to congress....

bought & paid for.

[MoonRiver]

22. UGH!

Please Dems pick someone better than this to lead the Senate caucus!

[neverforget]

23. Fuck you Chuck.

That is all.

[Scootaloo]

24. No surprises. n/t

[Marr]

26. I expect he's playing to donors.

His actions will amount to nothing, and no doubt he knows that.

[still_one]

35. I agree. The deal is going to happen.

[abelenkpe]

27. This is why democrats are such winners

Gotta admire how they stick together.

[VanillaRhapsody]

66. Yeah...like some stick together on DU

while claiming they won't vote for a certain candidate for President if they win the Primary!

[truebrit71]

79. Don't you ever stop fucking cheerleading?

It gets old. REAL old.

[Aerows]

28. This is my surprised face.

[BillZBubb]

29. Chuck just got his marching orders from Israel. He's a good soldier for them.

Way to undercut your own president, Chuck.

[Fred Sanders]

36. Follow the money. To who does Schumer owe felicity and allegiance? Not his own President, apparently

"Schumer was born in Brooklyn, the son of Selma (née Rosen) and Abraham Schumer.[6] His family is Jewish.[7] He attended public schools in Brooklyn, scoring a perfect 1600 on the SAT, and graduated as the valedictorian from James Madison High School in 1967.[8] Schumer competed for Madison High on the It's Academic television quiz show.[9]

He attended Harvard College, where he became interested in politics and campaigned for Eugene McCarthy in 1968.[10] After completing his undergraduate degree, he continued to Harvard Law School, earning his Juris Doctor with honors in 1974. Schumer passed the New York State Bar Exam in early 1975, but never practiced law, entering politics instead.[11]"

"Schumer was a supporter of the Iraq War Resolution, is an American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) member, and a strident pro-Israel member of Congress, although he was very critical of President George W. Bush's strategy in the Iraq War; he suggested that a commission of ex-generals be appointed to review it.[66] Nat Hentoff of the Village Voice has criticized Schumer for his stance on the issue of torture.[67]"

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Schumer#Foreign_policy

[diabeticman]

30. Corporate money talks and Schumer is listening.

[City Lights]

31. I'm no fan of Schumer.

I am terribly disappointed that Harry picked him to be his replacement.

[hifiguy]

32. Wonder how big the check was

that AIPAC wrote to his campaign committee.

[AngryAmish]

33. .

[still_one]

34. We will see what happens. Technically Obama doesn't need any of these assholes in Congress. He can

sign the agreement with the other countries. When his term is up, yes, they can withdraw from the agreement, but if the agreement holds internationally, then it would be us against the world, and effectively short of a pre-emptive war it would be meaningless what they do.

Personally I think there will be a few Senate republicans to support it.

I also am skeptical about anything coming out of politico.

It is going to get interesting. One thing I do believe, if by some reason the Senate was able to over-ride a veto, it would have to happen with democratic support, and if that is the case, and we actually go to war because of that, the Democrats will lose in 2016, and it won't just be from the liberal or left participants of the party, but many moderates also give up on the Democrats and stay home.

Keep in mind I do not think that is going to happen, and I also think the media is going to do everything in their power to try and build friction and division, but I believe a deal will go through

[muntrv]

37. So, will you enlist when you start the war with Iran?

[Major Hogwash]

38. ". . . I support the Corker bill . . ."

Fucking traitor!!

[Owl]

39. Schumer's an ass. N/t

[dorkzilla]

40. this schmuck is my Senator

Got news for ya Fuck...a lot of liberal Jews are staunchly anti-Bibi so betcha the base here in NY aint none too happy with your turncoating for more AIPAC scheckles.

Wtf is Reid thinking?

[Smithryee]

46. Count me among one of the many liberal Jews...

who doesn't like Bibi and his Likud. My avatar is Jewish.

[LiberalElite]

41. He's one of my senators

and I just communicated my disgust, for what THAT's worth.

[oberliner]

44. Peter King is looking to take his seat

That might be a factor here.

[Smithryee]

48. Zero chance.

New York remains solidly blue.

A primary would kick Schumer out and replaced with a liberal.

[oberliner]

51. D'Amato had the seat for nearly 20 years before Schumer

King is the same sort of Republican D'Amato was.

[Smithryee]

56. I remember D'Amato - and no, King isn't..

He's worse.. Much worse...

[oberliner]

57. Of course he is

Their biographies are almost identical. Born in NYC, raised on Long Island. Big shots among Nassau County Republicans. Wannabe tough "law and order" types. You couldn't find two more similar prominent NY Republicans if you tried.

[Renew Deal]

70. Unlikely he could pull it off.

I don't think either NY senator is vulnerable.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

45. Pick a country, Schumer.

Last edited Tue Apr 7, 2015, 11:54 AM - Edit history (1)

And I say that to any Democrat -- in office or not -- like him.

[ann---]

54. Dems who will vote for this bill

are Israeli citizens first. What a disgrace. None of us voted for
Boobi Nuttyyahoo, but that's whose policy our Congress is aiming
form. Hateful people - all who vote for this bill.

I may never vote again since the front-runner for presidential
candidate is Israel-loving, Boobi-loving Hillary.

[Thespian2]

47. Schumer, best buddy of Wall Street =

a really pathetic shill for the RePukian party.

[IL Lib]

49. Let him hear from you.

I live in Illinois but I sent a message anyway.

http://www.schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck

[geek tragedy]

50. Another pro-war neocon Democrat. He loved the Iraq war too, so of course now he wants war with Iran

Apparently the lesson of 2008 went unheeded.

[ann---]

52. Democrats

Last edited Mon Apr 6, 2015, 10:12 PM - Edit history (1)

are becoming useless. Is that better?

Won't vote for Schumer again.

[Bluenorthwest]

61. What a fucking vile comment that is.

nt

[bettyellen]

85. Wow, glad you edited out that anti- Semitic comment but would still love to know

WTF are you doing here if you despise democrats and Jews?

[ann---]

92. I despise no one

I said they were useless in this case. And, I didn't
realize that everyone has to support Israel in order
to "belong" here.

[Behind the Aegis]

93. It wasn't a matter of your not supporting Israel, it was your anti-Semitic comment.

When you make a comment like "Democrats are becoming useless. Jewish democrats are the worst.", it is a very obvious anti-Semitic remark.

[ann---]

94. So, I guess

this means you think Schumer is right to side with Israel's leader against a Democratic president's
attempt to seek a nuke deal in that region?

I don't. The Dems who blindly support Israel in this case are just as bad as the gopers who
have been trying for years to sabotage Obama's presidency.

By the way - I have already expressed my anger at this to Schumer and will not vote for him ever
again because of this.

[Behind the Aegis]

95. You really shouldn't be assuming anything.

You can claim the Dems who blindingly support Israel (sans proof of course) are as bad as GOP'ers, but you SINGELD OUT Jewish ones as the worst!

I am sure Schumer is crushed.

[ann---]

96. Why are they

agreeing to vote "yes" to over-ride Obama's veto if the
bill to stop the agreement passes?

Where are the Dems in this? I'm sick of them.

[Behind the Aegis]

97. They? I only see ONE mentioned in the article.

If you are so concerned about Dems in general, why the need to single out Jewish ones?

[Behind the Aegis]

102. And that is why your comment was anti-Semitic.

You most certainly DID single out some Dems, JEWISH ones. What is amazing is you are now "doubling down" on your anti-Semitic remark with "I just stated that I think most, if not all, Jewish politicians get money from rich doners (sic) and their votes are solidly behind Israel." Except, you didn't say that, you said, "Jewish Dems are the worst."

Disgraceful.

[Behind the Aegis]

104. Yeah, I can see how anti-Semitism is so passe.

But, you are correct about one thing, most people do know where people stand!

[Warren DeMontague]

101. Way to try to change the subject from that anti-semitic lovliness you edited out of your above post.

Grudgingly, i might add. "There- Is that better?" Heavy sigh heavy sigh.

Pro tip: short of deleting the thing, people can still find it.

[cali]

117. no one has to support Israel to belong here

But posting repeated bigoted comments, be they racist or anti Muslim or anti-Semitic or homophobic should get that poster a big fat boot.

[JI7]

98. this place has been welcoming to those sentiments for some time now

[Behind the Aegis]

99. This thread is a testament to it!

[cali]

116. sadly

that poster has posted dozens of such .comments. it's absolutely disgusting that she's allowed to continue posting on du. Odds are I'll get a hide for my post pointing this out. It's worth it. Bigotry, including blatant and repeated antisemitism has no place here.

[hrmjustin]

89. What a vile post! With your edits you fool no one!

[dflprincess]

53. I'm surprised he didn't sign Cotton's letter

Maybe no one thought to ask him.

[SCVDem]

58. Et Tu Chuck? n/t

[gregcrawford]

59. Schumer's a jerk-off...

... but why he's grandstanding on this is anyone's guess. I put my money on an Israeli connection.

[liberal N proud]

60. And this schmuck is in the position to be minority leader?

[kelly1mm]

62. OK, I guess I will take the abuse. I agree with Senator Schumer in this on principle. The holder

of the executive office of the US (aka The President - of whatever party) should not be able to bind the US into a position not favored or approved of (at the very least) by the legislative branch of government (aka congress) or BEST OPTION, the executive should follow the constitutionally mandated Treaty ratification procedure.

I am not saying that the President HAS to do any of these things, just that I believe he should. (Again, not issue/person specific, more a separation of powers and my dislike of the 'imperial presidency doctrine')

I will put on my flack jacket now.

[karynnj]

75. Absolutely not - for two reasons - it is not a treaty and there is no way in hell it could pass as

a treaty. That would take 67 votes. They BARELY got 67 votes for the START treaty with Kerry and Lugar, both sane and committed to it, running the SFRC. It was also a continuation of START which was started under Reagan -- and it was the lame duck session of 2010 when we still had 59 Democrats.

Someone up thread had it right - if they reach an agreement, Obama should sign it as he legally can.

Shumer may have had a perfect SAT, but he is really not considering the real possibilities here. If the bill fails - because the US Congress kills it, the likelihood is most of the world with lift the sanctions. The US can't control other countries.

This deal has a potential - just a potential for resetting US foreign policy is a better - ie not neo con - direction.

[kelly1mm]

78. So long as congress is not in the loop an approving this (like the Iraq use of force decalaration)

or is a ratified treaty it is not binding on the US and any future US President can undo it. While the rest of the world may continue to abide by it, the US does not seem to have any problems going it alone when it comes to sanctions (see Cuba).

More importantly to me at least is the PRINCIPLE. I get that you believe this is a good deal. I get that you like the President. However, the ends do not justify the means in my view. The Presidency (note I did not say this President but the office itself) is already way too powerful IMO vis-à-vis the legislative branch. Seeding even more institutional power to the executive branch just because you happen to like the result in this instance is, again in my opinion, foolhardy.

[karynnj]

87. but unilateral us sanctions will have little impact

Less than they had on Cuba.

[karynnj]

88. it does not meet the definition of a treaty

There have been hundreds of executive agreements. Even things like opening China, which was an even more complete re engagement.

This is not giving Obama more power than a president usually gets.

Just because Israel is unhappy, does not make them right.

[truebrit71]

81. Fuck Chuck.

[Cha]

84. What @SenSchumer (AIPAC/WallSt) doesn't get is #UNSC will eliminate sanctions if #Iran complies..

Bobfr @Our4thEstate
Follow
What @SenSchumer (AIPAC/WallSt) doesn't get is #UNSC will eliminate sanctions if #Iran complies

US Congress, like Bibi, are irrelevant
@VP

4:31 PM - 6 Apr 2015 19 Retweets 3 favorites

http://theobamadiary.com/2015/04/06/the-week-in-toons-13/

I hope so! thanks tracks

[JEB]

91. "Money trumps peace".

[JustAnotherGen]

105. This is why I said he's not the right person for the job

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1053568


He should not be the minority leader in the Senate.

All some Americans have right now is a man with Executive Orders and more important - a veto pen.

And if he is doing this because he is thinking two years from now he might need to use it against a President Cruz - then that is one hell of a chance to take . . . Winning back the Senate in 2016.

I will wait and see how this develops but at this time - he's wrong.

[Skidmore]

109. Instead of engaging in a collective wringing of hands and wailing and gnashing of teeth,

how about we put some concerted effort toward contacting legislators and Schumer, organizing marches to get across the support for a no war direction, and hitting up the media with letters to the editors and articles? Let's get a little proactive.

[malaise]

110. Not true

HE is insisting that Congress approves the deal

[Gothmog]

112. I am not sure that Schumer should be Harry Reid's successor

This is a really bad move on his part

[Mike Nelson]

114. Shocked that Schumer didn't see these headlines coming...

...hope he's counting his votes before they are cast. Let's have someone else, please.

[libpride_15]

120. I'll say it again - Warren for Leader!

I can't think of anyone better - if they pull that seniority crap, why not just grab the oldest geezer there and capitulate.