Anyone who has even the smallest bit of common sense knows the Iran deal is a complete and total disaster.
Well, apparently, it looks even worse when you actually read it, particularly page 19, paragraph 36, which might be the most important provision in the deal.
Check this out. It’s unbelievable.
From The Hill:
Paragraph 36 tells us when and how the agreement might end. Both friend and foe have touted this deal as “historic” and promised (or moaned) that its provisions will stay in place for the long term. But in practice, this is not a ten-year agreement or a fifteen-year agreement or an eternal agreement. Paragraph 36 tells us the truth: Any party—be it Iran or a future U.S. president—can essentially ditch the Iran nuclear deal with 35 days’ notice.
Iran might need to wait a little longer—an extra 30 working days—to check a box buried in Annex IV. But, after that, under Paragraph 36, Iran can claim that any of the P5+1 is “not meeting its commitments” under the agreement. That triggers a 35-day set of meetings. Once that clock runs, Iran can claim the issue “has not been resolved to [its] satisfaction” and that it “deems” that the issue “constitutes significant non-performance.” Iran can then “cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.” The agreement is done.Once Iran has received its $150 billion and locked in long-term business contracts with the West, this quick exit could be an attractive option. So, too, could Iran bolt later on, removing the restrictions that remain after years ten and fifteen, or it could bolt under some scenario hard to foresee now.The Paragraph 36 exit ramp could also be attractive for a Republican running for the White House. On January 21, 2017, a new U.S. president could point to an Iranian breach and, on February 25, 2017, pull the United States out of the agreement. He could also have diplomats sit through the five weeks of meetings and then exit at some later date; Paragraph 36 sets no deadline.
Paragraph 36 purports to be a dispute resolution clause. Underneath the costume, this is really a termination clause. Those who disagree will likely point to three arguments. First, they will say, moving along the exit ramp depends on making the case that someone else has violated the deal. If the P5+1 is keeping its end of the bargain, they will argue, then Iran would have no grounds to cut and run.
Yet in a complex deal such as this one, a party will likely be able to point to some plausible story of breach. Iran has a ready candidate. Paragraph 25 says that if any U.S. state or local government “is preventing the implementation of the sanctions lifting,” then the federal government must “take appropriate steps, taking into account all available authorities.”
“All” authorities? If the New York State Assembly slaps sanctions on Iran, does D.C. need to cut all money for New York’s highways? Stop funding New York’s Medicaid? Play Germany to New York’s Greece? Even then, Iran could point to some “authority” not used. The United States would not be “meeting its commitments,” Iran would say. Iran would “deem” the breach significant—note the subjective standard—permitting Iran to jump ship. This type of brainstorming is not limited to Iran. For a future U.S. president wanting to exit the deal, effective lawyering—or real Iranian breach—could supply the plausible story needed.
Read more: youngcons.com
- Hijab-Wearing Woman Becomes New Hair Model for L’Oreal. We Aren’t Joking. [Watch]
- Watch: Security Footage Captures Dramatic Shoot-Out Between Cops and Armed Robbers
- Newsweek: ‘Hillary Clinton could still become president if Russia probe finds conspiracy evidence’
- Watch: Al Sharpton’s Epic Fails When Reading Teleprompter Will Have You Rolling With Laughter, ‘The Thigh (Thai) Militarty’
- Psychologist Answers Journalist’s Question ‘Why should your right to freedom of speech trump a trans person’s right not to be offended?’ — Leaves Her Speechless [Watch]
- ICE to Crack Down on California the Sanctuary State
- Melania Trump Cuts Pork from First Lady Payroll After Michelle Obama’s Extensive Spending
- Report: DHS to File Criminal Charges Against Sanctuary City Politicians
- New Details: Thirteen Children Living in ‘House of Horrors’ Were Only Allowed to Shower Twice a Year, Among Other Cruel Treatment
- Pope Francis Claims Migrants’ Rights Overrule Importance of National Security
- Nationwide Manhunt for This POS — Murdered Multiple Women, Considered Armed and Dangerous
- Actors Blame Trump for Hawaii False Alarm — Jim Carrey “We are headed for suffering beyond all imagination.”
- Watch: Two Chicks are Boarding a Sailboat to Fight Poaching, Totally Bad*ss
- Oakland Mayor Vows to Go to Jail to Protect Sanctuary City
- Allah Adios: Muslim Migrants Finally Get Deported from US Under Trump Admin
- Trump Rioters During Inauguration Day Find Out What “Justice” Means
- WOW: Is Obama FORCING Trump Out of the Oval Office?
- Insane! Man Faces Jail Time for ‘Disturbing’ Manatees by Throwing Bucket of…