The President's actions in connection with the Paris Agreement evince an unprecedented level of executive unilateralism, the fruits of which Congress should oppose by any and all means.
why doesn t it require the consents of 2/3 of the senate? there will be a legal challenge to that executive agreement which isn t an agreement. terrible deal that essentially guarantees that some day soon there will be a nuclear armed iraq. brian: professor, the president said there will not be a nuclear armed iran in israel. does that matter. it doesn t matter what he says, it matters what happens. people in the administration are saying we have to get ready to control them but not prevents them. israel should not accept that because it poses an existential threat to their existence. brian: they are not going to accept it. the bottom line is if they he lou them back into the world economy they will use that money for both assad and syria.
it is a treaty. why doesn t it require the consents of 2/3 of the senate? there will be a legal challenge to that executive agreement which isn t an agreement. terrible deal that essentially guarantees that some day soon there will be a nuclear armed iraq. brian: professor, the president said there will not be a nuclear armed iran in israel. does that matter. it doesn t matter what he says, it matters what happens. people in the administration are saying we have to get ready to control them but not prevents them. israel should not accept that because it poses an existential threat to their existence. brian: they are not going to accept it. the bottom line is if they he lou them back into the world economy they will use that money
why doesn t it require the consents of 2/3 of the senate? there will be a legal challenge to that executive agreement which isn t an agreement. terrible deal that essentially guarantees that some day soon there will be a nuclear armed iraq. brian: professor, the president said there will not be a nuclear armed iran in israel. does that matter. it doesn t matter what he says, it matters what happens. people in the administration are saying we have to get ready to control them but not prevents them. israel should not accept that because it poses an existential threat to their existence. brian: they are not going to accept it. the bottom line is if they he lou them back into the world economy they will use that money
treaty. it is a treaty. why doesn t it require the consents of 2/3 of the senate? there will be a legal challenge to that executive agreement which isn t an agreement. terrible deal that essentially guarantees that some day soon there will be a nuclear armed iraq. brian: professor, the president said there will not be a nuclear armed iran in israel. does that matter. it doesn t matter what he says, it matters what happens. people in the administration are saying we have to get ready to control them but not prevents them. israel should not accept that because it poses an existential threat to their existence. brian: they are not going to accept it. the bottom line is if they he lou them back into the world economy they will use that money