One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Reid to prevent v**e on Iran nuclear deal
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
Sep 5, 2015 17:38:56   #
KHH1
 
By RUDY TAKALA (@RUDYTAKALA) • 9/5/15 4:38 PM
ShareTweetRedditDiggMailPrintMore
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will try to prevent the Senate from v****g on President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

In a statement issued on Saturday, Reid said that Democrats would attempt to use the filibuster to prevent the Senate from holding even a symbolic v**e on the issue, which would likely result in an embarrassing outcome for Democrats. "I recently informed Senator McConnell that after a period of robust debate, Democrats would be happy to proceed straight to a final passage v**e," Reid said in the statement, suggesting "robust debate" was a coy way of saying that the debate will not end unless Republicans can muster 60 v**es to do so.

Under the terms of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed earlier this year, the Senate has the option of v****g in favor of the deal, v****g against it or taking no action at all. If the Senate were to v**e against the deal, President Obama would still be able to veto the action. At least 67 v**es would be required to override such a veto.

Presently, Democrats have at least 38 v**es in favor of the deal. Just three — Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., have said they would join Republicans in v****g against it. If Republicans v**e in unison, that means at least 57 senators would v**e against the deal. While that would be short of the 67 required to override a veto, it would be enough to humiliate the administration.

Reply
Sep 5, 2015 18:32:16   #
Ronald Hatt Loc: Lansing, Mich
 
KHH1 wrote:
By RUDY TAKALA (@RUDYTAKALA) • 9/5/15 4:38 PM
ShareTweetRedditDiggMailPrintMore
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will try to prevent the Senate from v****g on President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

In a statement issued on Saturday, Reid said that Democrats would attempt to use the filibuster to prevent the Senate from holding even a symbolic v**e on the issue, which would likely result in an embarrassing outcome for Democrats. "I recently informed Senator McConnell that after a period of robust debate, Democrats would be happy to proceed straight to a final passage v**e," Reid said in the statement, suggesting "robust debate" was a coy way of saying that the debate will not end unless Republicans can muster 60 v**es to do so.

Under the terms of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed earlier this year, the Senate has the option of v****g in favor of the deal, v****g against it or taking no action at all. If the Senate were to v**e against the deal, President Obama would still be able to veto the action. At least 67 v**es would be required to override such a veto.

Presently, Democrats have at least 38 v**es in favor of the deal. Just three — Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., have said they would join Republicans in v****g against it. If Republicans v**e in unison, that means at least 57 senators would v**e against the deal. While that would be short of the 67 required to override a veto, it would be enough to humiliate the administration.
By RUDY TAKALA (@RUDYTAKALA) • 9/5/15 4:38 PM br S... (show quote)


"SOMEONE"! COMMIT DUNGEY HARRY REID TO AN ASYLUM......QUICKLY!....{ WHAT A "P.O.S.! "}

Reply
Sep 5, 2015 18:47:05   #
solarkin
 
It's a waste of time.
What Congress does will change nothing.
China, France,Germany,Britain and Russia have already given the deal a pass.
We have no control over Iran's already released assets.

Reply
 
 
Sep 5, 2015 20:24:18   #
karpenter Loc: Headin' Fer Da Hills !!
 
America Can't Lead When We Elect A President That Doesn't Know How
...Or Cares

Reply
Sep 5, 2015 21:55:41   #
markinny
 
karpenter wrote:
America Can't Lead When We Elect A President That Doesn't Know How
...Or Cares


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Sep 5, 2015 22:13:38   #
at41
 
Ronald Hatt wrote:
"SOMEONE"! COMMIT DUNGEY HARRY REID TO AN ASYLUM......QUICKLY!....{ WHAT A "P.O.S.! "}


I thought that Republicans were in the majority. How does the head of the minority party prevent a v**e?

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 02:45:52   #
Gracesandagato
 
Reid has so much money he thins he should rue the country

Reply
 
 
Sep 6, 2015 06:36:34   #
Ronald Hatt Loc: Lansing, Mich
 
at41 wrote:
I thought that Republicans were in the majority. How does the head of the minority party prevent a v**e?


By "threatening" the Libturds, in the Congress!

{& who knows "what" dirt he has on the moderate/liberal Conservatives, in Congress}......America's current politicians, on both sides {the majority of them}, are impeding America's progress, at solving problems!

This P.O.S. Reid, has done as much harm to America, as "BATH HOUSE BARRY", & his band of miscreant Muslim, "closet homo's"!................................ :thumbdown:

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 08:20:59   #
JMHO Loc: Utah
 
KHH1 wrote:
By RUDY TAKALA (@RUDYTAKALA) • 9/5/15 4:38 PM
ShareTweetRedditDiggMailPrintMore
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., will try to prevent the Senate from v****g on President Obama's nuclear deal with Iran.

In a statement issued on Saturday, Reid said that Democrats would attempt to use the filibuster to prevent the Senate from holding even a symbolic v**e on the issue, which would likely result in an embarrassing outcome for Democrats. "I recently informed Senator McConnell that after a period of robust debate, Democrats would be happy to proceed straight to a final passage v**e," Reid said in the statement, suggesting "robust debate" was a coy way of saying that the debate will not end unless Republicans can muster 60 v**es to do so.

Under the terms of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act passed earlier this year, the Senate has the option of v****g in favor of the deal, v****g against it or taking no action at all. If the Senate were to v**e against the deal, President Obama would still be able to veto the action. At least 67 v**es would be required to override such a veto.

Presently, Democrats have at least 38 v**es in favor of the deal. Just three — Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and Ben Cardin, D-Md., have said they would join Republicans in v****g against it. If Republicans v**e in unison, that means at least 57 senators would v**e against the deal. While that would be short of the 67 required to override a veto, it would be enough to humiliate the administration.
By RUDY TAKALA (@RUDYTAKALA) • 9/5/15 4:38 PM br S... (show quote)


You didn't expect Reid to do anything good for the country, did you?

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 08:28:07   #
Ronald Hatt Loc: Lansing, Mich
 
JMHO wrote:
You didn't expect Reid to do anything good for the country, did you?


khh1 = delusional!

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 08:43:54   #
Gracesandagato
 
He needs to stay to just stay home .

Reply
 
 
Sep 6, 2015 09:43:51   #
DamnYANKEE
 
karpenter wrote:
America Can't Lead When We Elect A President That Doesn't Know How
...Or Cares


What President . We don't have one .

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 09:44:50   #
DamnYANKEE
 
Ronald Hatt wrote:
khh1 = delusional!


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 13:09:02   #
markinny
 
DamnYANKEE wrote:
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


:lol: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Sep 6, 2015 17:15:21   #
KHH1
 
So sad for the RIGHT that the DEMS are still calling the shots after that midterm victory of yours....just admit it...Dems are smarter than the GOP....Obama is getting HIS agenda we v**ed for him to....completed...he is who WE v**ed for to lead the country and his approval rating from US is right around 85-90%........so moan and whine all you like....things look great from my vantage point..... :thumbup:

Reply
Page 1 of 3 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.