Sanders/Paul Votes Against Russian Sanctions

dukkha

Verified User
The Senate was nearly unanimous on Thursday passing a bill that would slap Russia with new sanctions and give Congress the power to review any White House attempts to roll them back.
The Senate approved the bill 98-2, with Republican Rand Paul of Kentucky and Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont voting against the measure. The bill, which includes both Russian and Iranian sanctions, now heads to the House, which still needs to pass it before it goes to President Donald Trump's desk.
The measure is widely seen as a rebuke to Trump, as it hits Russia with new sanctions to punish Moscow for its interference in US elections, as well as over Moscow's aggression in Ukraine and Syria.

The bill establishes a review process for Congress to have a say whether the White House eases Russia sanctions. It also establishes new sanctions against those conducting cyberattacks on behalf of the Russian government as well as supplying arms to Syrian President Bashar Assad, and it allows for sanctions to hit Russia's mining, metals, shipping and railways sectors.
"We moved to make the Congress, not the President, the final arbiter of sanctions relief when necessary," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. "Any idea of the President that he can lift sanctions on his own for whatever reason are dashed by this legislation."

The Russia sanctions measure was added as an amendment to an Iranian sanctions bill, after a deal was struck between the heads of the Senate Foreign Relations and Banking Committees. The Russia amendment was added to the sanctions bill in a 97-2 vote on Wednesday.
Despite the overwhelming vote, the Russia sanctions package was no sure thing. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker of Tennessee had initially been hesitant to take it up, as the administration had expressed a hope it could improve relations with Moscow.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said this week that he was wary of Congress taking actions that could interfere with the administration's efforts to improve relations with Russia.
"What I wouldn't want to do is close the channels off" Tillerson told the Senate

The Senate also passed two amendments before approving the bill. The first was a technical change that the sanctions would not apply to NASA and commercial space launches, as Russian rocket engines are used for the American Atlas V and Antares rockets.
The second reaffirmed "the strategic importance of Article 5" in NATO, the principle that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all members of the alliance.
Trump announced at a news conference last week that he would support Article 5 after he failed to mention it in a speech at NATO headquarters last month

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/15/politics/russia-sanctions-senate-trump/index.html
 
The Senate approved the bill 98-2

Money quote right there.

Your defense of the Kremlin is transparently partisan, and frankly embarrassing.

Prior to the presidency of Mr. Pussy Grabber you never, ever, in you entire adult life, advocated on behalf of the Kremlin, started threads in their defense, or lectured people on how we needed to stop being mean to the Kremlin.

Only your unabashed worship of President Pussy Grabber has led you down this path. That, and nothing else. No deep, long-held principles, no consistent guiding moral philosophy about Russia.

Just your worship of Trump leads you to being a Kremlin apologist.
 
Sanders voted against the sanctions because of America's lopsided support for Saudi Arabia, against Iran.
 
This could spell trouble for Comrade Trumpsky.

Putin will not tolerate his failure to reign in Congress.

Punishment might be forthcoming.

We might be seeing the pee-pee tape sooner than we thought.

Or the financial documents detailing what dirt those Russian banks have on him.
 
lots to unpack here, notice Chucky Boy wants to prevent POTUS from lifting sanctions for any reason..
Gee do you think he said the same thing about Obama? It's more "resistance" -damn the executive's abilty to conduct policy.

Rand Paul -who along w/Tulsi Gabbard is about the only sane folks out there who resist American Exceptionalism- sees the danger of interfering with Russian weapons to Syria.

They both are consistent that meddling in Syria in any fashion encourages blowback. bless them both.
Even Bernie who doesn't oppose sanctions for the "right reasons"(my characterization) manages to stumble into the correct posture-much like Libya where he pointed out the dangers of too many wars/interventionism
 
Sanders voted against the sanctions because of America's lopsided support for Saudi Arabia, against Iran.
indeed I addressed this. His reasoning was the same sanctions would interfere with the Iran deal.Still I prefer someone who gets it right; even if they arrive there by a circuitous route
 
lots to unpack here, notice Chucky Boy wants to prevent POTUS from lifting sanctions for any reason..
Gee do you think he said the same thing about Obama? It's more "resistance" -damn the executive's abilty to conduct policy.

Rand Paul -who along w/Tulsi Gabbard is about the only sane folks out there who resist American Exceptionalism- sees the danger of interfering with Russian weapons to Syria.

They both are consistent that meddling in Syria in any fashion encourages blowback. bless them both.
Even Bernie who doesn't oppose sanctions for the "right reasons"(my characterization) manages to stumble into the correct posture-much like Libya where he pointed out the dangers of too many wars/interventionism

Nope, You are not allowed to be the self-appointed defender of the Kremlin, unless you can show you were starting threads that we needed to stop being mean to Putin long before your hero Trump ran for Prez started colluding with Russian intelligence agencies, .

Until you can, I assume all your pro-Kremlin posts are just part of your strategy to defend your Orange Clown.
 
The Senate was nearly unanimous on Thursday passing a bill that would slap Russia with new sanctions and give Congress the power to review any White House attempts to roll them back.
The Senate approved the bill 98-2, with Republican Rand Paul of Kentucky and Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont voting against the measure. The bill, which includes both Russian and Iranian sanctions, now heads to the House, which still needs to pass it before it goes to President Donald Trump's desk.
The measure is widely seen as a rebuke to Trump, as it hits Russia with new sanctions to punish Moscow for its interference in US elections, as well as over Moscow's aggression in Ukraine and Syria.

The bill establishes a review process for Congress to have a say whether the White House eases Russia sanctions. It also establishes new sanctions against those conducting cyberattacks on behalf of the Russian government as well as supplying arms to Syrian President Bashar Assad, and it allows for sanctions to hit Russia's mining, metals, shipping and railways sectors.
"We moved to make the Congress, not the President, the final arbiter of sanctions relief when necessary," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. "Any idea of the President that he can lift sanctions on his own for whatever reason are dashed by this legislation."

The Russia sanctions measure was added as an amendment to an Iranian sanctions bill, after a deal was struck between the heads of the Senate Foreign Relations and Banking Committees. The Russia amendment was added to the sanctions bill in a 97-2 vote on Wednesday.
Despite the overwhelming vote, the Russia sanctions package was no sure thing. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker of Tennessee had initially been hesitant to take it up, as the administration had expressed a hope it could improve relations with Moscow.
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said this week that he was wary of Congress taking actions that could interfere with the administration's efforts to improve relations with Russia.
"What I wouldn't want to do is close the channels off" Tillerson told the Senate

The Senate also passed two amendments before approving the bill. The first was a technical change that the sanctions would not apply to NASA and commercial space launches, as Russian rocket engines are used for the American Atlas V and Antares rockets.
The second reaffirmed "the strategic importance of Article 5" in NATO, the principle that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all members of the alliance.
Trump announced at a news conference last week that he would support Article 5 after he failed to mention it in a speech at NATO headquarters last month

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/15/politics/russia-sanctions-senate-trump/index.html

So the crack addicts all voted to allow the use of Russian ICBM rocket engines to power NASA.

They are all fucked up, no exceptions
 
indeed I addressed this. His reasoning was the same sanctions would interfere with the Iran deal.Still I prefer someone who gets it right; even if they arrive there by a circuitous route

Sanders said that Russia should be punished, and would have supported exclusive sanctions on Russia.
 
Money quote right there.

Your defense of the Kremlin is transparently partisan, and frankly embarrassing.

Prior to the presidency of Mr. Pussy Grabber you never, ever, in you entire adult life, advocated on behalf of the Kremlin, started threads in their defense, or lectured people on how we needed to stop being mean to the Kremlin.

Only your unabashed worship of President Pussy Grabber has led you down this path. That, and nothing else. No deep, long-held principles, no consistent guiding moral philosophy about Russia.

Just your worship of Trump leads you to being a Kremlin apologist.

idiot. sanctimonious idiot at that. Opposition to Congressional over-reach ( where Congress can set sanctions -but having only Congress be able to lift them results in curbing the executives ability to work changes with Russia) is exactly the point Tillerson was making
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said this week that he was wary of Congress taking actions that could interfere with the administration's efforts to improve relations with Russia.
"What I wouldn't want to do is close the channels off" Tillerson told the Senate

I have long been anti-war opponent-probably before when you were alive during Vietnam
Cold War 2 has it's own dangers, (like battlefield tactical nukes), and sets up needless tripwires for no improved security. I defy you to show me otherwise,, plus it's money poorly spent..

But you continue your Slavic Pavlovian response to anything that betters relations.
Play that mindless zero sum game, There are those of us who look for better way.

your sig: Clinton and her "no fly" in Syria lost, It's about time you came to grips with reality there too.
 
Sanders said that Russia should be punished, and would have supported exclusive sanctions on Russia.
yes. as stated Sanders got their albeit flawed reasoning.
He did the same for Hillary's/Obama Libyan Intervention, and his foreign policy was one of "coalitions" which isn't all that practical.

He gets points for landing on the right squares no matter how he got there
 
Nope, You are not allowed to be the self-appointed defender of the Kremlin, unless you can show you were starting threads that we needed to stop being mean to Putin long before your hero Trump ran for Prez started colluding with Russian intelligence agencies, .

Until you can, I assume all your pro-Kremlin posts are just part of your strategy to defend your Orange Clown.

first of I was on many message boards, and JPP only became my primary after the demise of DCJ.

secondly it's not about being "mean to Putin", it's about the RELATIONSHIP to Putin ( realpolitik).

Sanctions serve none, they do not accomplish anything, and they hurt all parties involved.
It's why Germany and France (etc) don't want them and why Merkel was always a tough sell for Obama-even for the first round after Crimea..

I never see anyone tell us why sanctions are in our best interests,
other then simplistic "punishing Putin"
 
idiot. sanctimonious idiot at that. Opposition to Congressional over-reach ( where Congress can set sanctions -but having only Congress be able to lift them results in curbing the executives ability to work changes with Russia) is exactly the point Tillerson was making

I have long been anti-war opponent-probably before when you were alive during Vietnam
Cold War 2 has it's own dangers, (like battlefield tactical nukes), and sets up needless tripwires for no improved security. I defy you to show me otherwise,, plus it's money poorly spent..

But you continue your Slavic Pavlovian response to anything that betters relations.
Play that mindless zero sum game, There are those of us who look for better way.

your sig: Clinton and her "no fly" in Syria lost, It's about time you came to grips with reality there too.

"anti-war opponent"? Meaning you support wars?
 
first of I was on many message boards, and JPP only became my primary after the demise of DCJ.

secondly it's not about being "mean to Putin", it's about the RELATIONSHIP to Putin ( realpolitik).

Sanctions serve none, they do not accomplish anything, and they hurt all parties involved.
It's why Germany and France (etc) don't want them and why Merkel was always a tough sell for Obama-even for the first round after Crimea..

I never see anyone tell us why sanctions are in our best interests,
other then simplistic "punishing Putin"

Sometimes punishment is just what is needed.

Make the punishment hurt enough and maybe he'll think twice before ever again meddling in our Presidential elections, for the benefit of his chosen preferred candidate over the other.
 
Nope, You are not allowed to be the self-appointed defender of the Kremlin, unless you can show you were starting threads that we needed to stop being mean to Putin long before your hero Trump ran for Prez started colluding with Russian intelligence agencies, .

Until you can, I assume all your pro-Kremlin posts are just part of your strategy to defend your Orange Clown.

I've been operating under the impression that anatta is pro-Putin rather than pro-Trump.
 
Sometimes punishment is just what is needed.

Make the punishment hurt enough and maybe he'll think twice before ever again meddling in our Presidential elections, for the benefit of his chosen preferred candidate over the other.

sanctions have never had any effect.
 
Back
Top