McConnell must have a 'Gingrich appointed House Historian Christina Jeffrey' type, writing in the history section of senate . gov.
The constitution doesn't mention how to terminate treaties, because that undercuts the 'our word is our bond' nature of treaties, can't 'question or cast doubt on the full faith and credit of the United States.' Nobody would engage in a treaty with us, if 'how to get out of treaties' was written down like that.
Because obviously treaties' power rests in the idea that our word is our bond, not 'we're agreeing to do this, until we stab you in the back'. Nobody would ever agree to sign a treaty with someone who shows, a second after signing, that their word can't be trusted.
So Senate history page comes up with 3 examples of treaty abrogation: one example, where a 'congress declaring an act of war' type action occurred, all the ceremony debate and resolution announcement stuff, way back when our treaties with France's Monarch and Republic governments were dropped when the French Directorate was in charge, on the way to Napoleon. A bunch of unstable governments, we cut deals with them vs England, and paid for the Louisiana Purchase, didn't go to war.
The other 2 feature Jimmy Carter, that's the repugs in 'senate historian staff' sticking it to us, saying 'stick it in your a**, whatabout Jimmy Carter'. They are interesting, because Nixon recognized China, so he could keep protecting the world from the dangerous spread of Vietnamese Communism. Carter went unopposed in his treaty abrogation with Taiwan. Carter gets to carry the can for nixon repugs.
The other one, Repug Raygun kept beating Carter over the head with the Panama Canal treaty, pushing to abrogate any treaty that gave back the Canal. Even rightwing John Wayne assailed Raygun's demagoguery on this issue, publicly. (He was probably getting paid by Panama lobbying interests, but all he said was 'read the treaty, ronny.') Raygun's repug vp Poppy bush later invaded Panama. But we get to read that Jimmy abrogated the treaty, in accordance with terms set by Congress.
But 'the breaking of 2 treaties during the Jimmy Carter Admin stirred controversy', right, Mitch the bitch?
Good info link and excerpt citation, I do appreciate them, BRDS. They do have good info and ideas in them, and I don't question that you are anything but a good strong Dem, I always like your stuff, we only ever had one minor quibble, re Allegheny county vs Philly population / Dem registration.
But it really is a slanted, weaselly worded historical attempt by the repugs to tell us 'treaties mean nothing'. 'Your side violated treaties. Our word means nothing. The US's word means nothing. These things get broken, sometimes, mostly and most controversially, by the Dems.'
They're saying this while they keep trying to violate every constitutional law enforceable treaty that gets in their way, NATO, UN, Geneva Convention, trade, bilateral western alliance, you name it. So hard to build and enact, so easy to dissolve with the snap of their fingers.
= new reply since forum marked as read
