That could be the 1st evah NES dick picUmmm...I took that this morning specifically for my post to show my level of readiness for this f***ery.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
That could be the 1st evah NES dick picUmmm...I took that this morning specifically for my post to show my level of readiness for this f***ery.
I’ve been called worseThat could be the 1st evah NES dick pic
Melt it down to make some guns.Now that’s a statue that has
To come down!!
This. Ratification is the only thing that matters. Even then, it would be suspect as the Constitution supersede properly ratified treaties.Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.
Oh I’m sure they’ve got big plans post rigged-2022 electionGood luck getting that ratified in the Senate.
Tell me about it!!!!Good.
This aught to speed things up a little bit.
I’m getting tired of sitting around with my dick in my hands waiting for the other shoe to drop.
View attachment 519285
What does it matter if it's approved in the senate? The Congress is NEVER going to impeach Biden, impeachment is a concept from the 18th Century created by men who didn't think that political parties would exist. Don't bank on the 25th Amendment either, Kamala would never use it for something like a UN arms treaty.Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.
Treaty ClauseWhat does it matter if it's approved in the senate? ...
And who and what army is going to enforce that part of the Constitution?Treaty Clause
[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...
Google "define aught" and "define ought"This aught to speed things up a little bit.
Never picture you for a spelling Nazi?!?!Google "define aught" and "define ought"
Good luck getting that ratified in the Senate.
Good.
This aught to speed things up a little bit.
I’m getting tired of sitting around with my dick in my hands waiting for the other shoe to drop.
View attachment 519285
They'll do it the same way Obama got his deal with Iran through.
The Constitution requires that treaties need ratification of Senate by a supermajority of two thirds. Obama did not have that. What Congress did instead is pass a statute authorizing the President (limited to the current President in the current case of Iran) to negotiate an agreement that is called anything but a Treaty and implement it without the 2/3 consent, and require two thirds of the Senate to negate it if they don't agree. This literally pretends to turn the meaning upside down.
RINOs did that! They wanted to let him get his agreement but wash their own hands of any responsibility.
The Constitution explicitly declares any Treaty to be superior to federal or state laws. SCOTUS has never ruled on whether any Treaty can be ratified that contained provisions in conflict with the Constitution. Given the "Lack of Standing" excuse they use to avoid tackling controversial issues which may upset the other branches, I have zero confidence that the plain language of 2A wouldn't become even more of a dead letter than it already is. It would be the mechanism to drive the final nail into the coffin.
That approach is useless as the next President can just walk away from the agreement... Just like Trump did.
The same one that ensures the Paris Climate Accords don't mean sh¡t in the United StatesAnd who and what army is going to enforce that part of the Constitution?
That's the same Congress that has passedThey'll do it the same way Obama got his deal with Iran through.
The Constitution requires that treaties need ratification of Senate by a supermajority of two thirds. Obama did not have that. What Congress did instead is pass a statute authorizing the President (limited to the current President in the current case of Iran) to negotiate an agreement ...
Those tactical Birkenstocks in the background should be on ... with black socks.