"Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Slow your roll. This is an absurd representation and you might want to ask Nancy Pelosi about that -- given that she did not simply write a letter but dared to actually conduct a foreign policy visit in a foreign capital. Is the New York Times reporting on the event sufficient?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/world/middleeast/04cnd-pelosi.html?_r=2&
And she didn't go alone. Pelosi was accompanied by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA), Tom Lantos (D-CA), Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), Nick J. Rahall II (D-WV), and Keith Ellison (D-MN).
Not that y'all give a damn about the blatant hypocrisy in this post.
Oh, fact finding. That's what it was ? Did she also take a contract for the Brooklyn Bridge on that "fact-finding" mission ?
I read the link. Completely different circumstances. You are wrong Rattler Gator. There was no negotiations ongoing with Syria at the time. Bush was not engaged with them at all. Nothing was on the table. Nothing. Pelosi and company went as a good faith effort to show the US was willing to simply meet with them. She proposed nothing and was not undercutting the Bush Administration at all. In addition several Republicans went during a separate trip that year, which you conveniently left out of your comment.
Of course I've heard of them. Remember, my point was the absurd hypocrisy of this post which you're simply extending via semantics. If this is in fact literally unprecedented then I'm sure our A.G. will prosecute to the fullest extent of the law -- given that we're loosely tossing around the word traitor these days. And if it's an unprecedented violation of the constitution, then his DUTY is to prosecute. We'll see what happens. Don't hold your breath.
And MusicMan, no -- I'm not wrong. The President of the United State was trying to ISOLATE Syria at the time, so any effort to politically do the opposite was conducting foreign policy in contravention of the chief executive. That Republican mission was to make clear the isolation. Pelosi and her crew directly tried to contravene that isolation. Don't think everyone is gullible to the stupid partisan nonsense often put out on this board to suit the needs. Every damn body knew what she was doing. Especially her.
Here, all that's happening is a reminder to the Iranians of the American reality. Treaties have to come through the United States Senate. And, a reminder to the President -- think three times before you shit on our allies.
In this thread: blind liberals thinking that only Republicans break the law and ignore the Constitution.
But wait, Obama has droned American citizens over seas, extended the patriot act, and has locked up more people for whistle blowing than any president in history.
Stop fighting over R vs D, they're the same thing! Crooks and criminals!
good luck on convicting anyone under the Logan Act
Quote from: stephendare on March 10, 2015, 09:48:16 PM
Quote from: coredumped on March 10, 2015, 09:39:28 PM
In this thread: blind liberals thinking that only Republicans break the law and ignore the Constitution.
But wait, Obama has continued to droned American citizens over seas, extended the patriot act after the worst and most troublesome parts of it were amended and/or expired, and has locked up more people for whistle blowing than any president in history.
Stop fighting over R vs D, they're the same thing! Crooks and criminals!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamal_Derwish
http://publicrecordmedia.com/2011/02/usa-patriot-act-revisions/
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/president-obama-signs-law-upgrading-whistleblower-protections
incidentally, this is a republican op ed on revising or banning the PATRIOT act. (which Im with you on, incidentally)
http://www.creators.com/opinion/dick-morris/good-news-for-terrorists-democratic-revisions-to-the-patriot-act.html
This is truly a person blinded by his love for the party. I'm not saying republicans were good for Americans rights, but you can't say they were worse. Obama has trampled on the constitution just as bad as Bush did (by the way, when can we stop blaming Bush, it's been many years now).
http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/mar/19/kesha-rogers/four-us-citizens-killed-obama-drone-strikes-3-were/
Most "transparent administration in history" has silenced more people than any president in history.
Evil party v. Stupid party
All of this rhetoric is to distract and divide the electorate. The parties have become so powerful, individual candidates may get voted out but guess who is replacing them? Another rank and file party chosen candidate. If an outsider gets elected, they still have to face the fact that the parties control the committees.
Spend just some time researching donors on opensecrets.org. Look at the amount of money that is being generated for these parties and their candidates. Hundreds of Millions of dollars to be spent on TV ads, junk mailers, fact finding missions, expensive trips and dinners for people who can already afford expensive trips and dinners. From the big banks and Wall Street, to people like Sheldon Adelson trying buy legislation, it's all about the money for access to Congress. It's sickening. And it will continue because people will continue to choose the lesser of two evils, which keeps the two evils in power.
How can Congress be fixed? Can it be fixed?
maybe, depends if you can say what Obama is negotiating is a treaty or not. Either way, it was a dumb move to pen the letter.
Unfortunately, I think it will continue on this path. Way back when, people used to discuss ideas face to face, in bars, congregations, meeting halls, etc. Now- it is over the internet mainly, and it usually ends in name calling.
Unless we can get back to the frank discussion of ideas, face to face, and without the "I'm right and you are wrong because I am a (insert political party here) and you are not"- I don't see a solution.
Bleak I know, but give me a compelling argument against.
Are you willing to charge Obama the same for meeting with foreign leaders during his first campaign before he was elected? Or perhaps Jimmy Carter for meddling during the Bush presidency?
Better yet, just read this article and see how stupid this treason claim is. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monica-bauer/the-logan-act-and-the-treason-meme-click-bait-for-liberals_b_6849040.html
Quote from: stephendare on March 12, 2015, 01:42:18 PM
Quote from: carpnter on March 12, 2015, 10:04:56 AM
Are you willing to charge Obama the same for meeting with foreign leaders during his first campaign before he was elected? Or perhaps Jimmy Carter for meddling during the Bush presidency?
Better yet, just read this article aand see how stupid this treason cclaim is. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monica-bauer/the-logan-act-and-the-treason-meme-click-bait-for-liberals_b_6849040.html
you do know the difference between 'talking to' and 'negotiating foreign policy', right?
Or are they all the same?
Like, if you were photographed together once, is it the same thing as having been married?
And you didn't read the article.