Clearly the GOP violated the Logan Act. Should they be prosecuted?

[Procrustes Stretched]

In this instance, with much of Congress not trusting this President to negotiate a nuclear treaty with Iran that would be in the best interests of the United States...

...

Oh! It's about the best interests of the US and the interests of Israel?

Ok. I guess that is why Netanyahu was invited

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yea it sure is great the the Republicans are willing to screw up any agreement with Iran...

....

Newsflash, mine good colleague... there never WAS a 'deal'... there never COULD have been a 'deal'... Iran wants nukes... all they were ever doing is stalling.

Kondor3 's crystal ball has been known to be cloudy, cloudy, cloudy

 

[Dot Com]

The Cotton 47 are opportunistic hack traitors plain & simple.

 

[Dot Com]

No, because you narcissists are causing this country great damage.

And no, I don't expect someone like you to "get it".

.

ROFL. Ironic post is ironic.

 

[Kondor3]

...Unless of course you think the Congress has the power to make and undermine treaties and hold their own negotiations with foreign governments.

Nope. Never said so. Never believed so.

But the Senate has the right of advice and consent with respect to treaties, and withholding of 'consent' serves as a 'legislative veto' of a President's actions, and, when coupled with the Power of the National Purse, as held by the House, this makes the President accountable to the Congress de facto, with respect to treaties.

...

...

You say no, but then you go and contradict yourself.

You lost me...

 

[kaz]

So what is the Logan Act? Unless you're familiar with rarely used, early American laws, you may have never heard of it.

It reads:

"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.

"This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects."

Why The GOP Iran Letter Is Spurring Debate Over An 18th Century Law The Two-Way NPR


--------------------

A felony punishable by fine and three years in prison. What do you think? After what they've done to this president and to the country, should they be prosecuted?

So how did they violate the Logan act?

 

[Kondor3]

The Cotton 47 are opportunistic hack traitors plain & simple.

Hardly...

Merely acting within the framework of their mandate, to counterbalance a misguided executive, and to prevent that executive from doing even more damage than he's already done...

 

[Kondor3]

In this instance, with much of Congress not trusting this President to negotiate a nuclear treaty with Iran that would be in the best interests of the United States...

...

Oh! It's about the best interests of the US and the interests of Israel?

Ok. I guess that is why Netanyahu was invited

Did I say anything about Israel or Netanyahu?

And, cannot the interests of the United States and Israel overlap or coincide, in this context?

Many believe this to be the case.

 

[Kondor3]

Yea it sure is great the the Republicans are willing to screw up any agreement with Iran...

....

Newsflash, mine good colleague... there never WAS a 'deal'... there never COULD have been a 'deal'... Iran wants nukes... all they were ever doing is stalling.

Kondor3 's crystal ball has been known to be cloudy, cloudy, cloudy

When the Supreme Leader of the Iranian religious autocracy publicly denounces the terms announced by the United States, to be inaccurate, and/or a downright lie, well...

And given that we are dealing with religious fanatics who routinely encourage martyrdom and who are aggressively pursuing Shia Militarism throughout the region...

Well, mine good colleague, it doesn't really take much of a crystal ball to predict such things (as a No-Deal scenario) in advance, does it?

Pretty much what the Pubs expected of the Iranian ayatollahs all along.

That's not crediting them with an over-abundance of ability to predict the future...

Just more common sense than your average fourth-grade elementary school unicorns-and-rainbows school-child...

Something regrettably and embarrassingly lacking in the Obumbe Administration... in either the White House OR the State Department...

Your boy screwed the pooch, the Pubs called it, and now you're upset...

As you should be...

But at the wrong people...

 

[SuperDemocrat]

So what is the Logan Act? Unless you're familiar with rarely used, early American laws, you may have never heard of it.

It reads:

"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.

"This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects."

Why The GOP Iran Letter Is Spurring Debate Over An 18th Century Law The Two-Way NPR


--------------------

A felony punishable by fine and three years in prison. What do you think? After what they've done to this president and to the country, should they be prosecuted?

Considering Obama negotiated without the permission of the congress then Obama should be put in jail. The only problem with that is that the citizenship status of Obama might become a plausible defence.

 

[mikegriffith1]

Clearly, you don't understand the Logan Act.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

...Unless of course you think the Congress has the power to make and undermine treaties and hold their own negotiations with foreign governments.

Nope. Never said so. Never believed so.

But the Senate has the right of advice and consent with respect to treaties, and withholding of 'consent' serves as a 'legislative veto' of a President's actions, and, when coupled with the Power of the National Purse, as held by the House, this makes the President accountable to the Congress de facto, with respect to treaties.

...

...

You say no, but then you go and contradict yourself.

You lost me...

you lost yourself

Executive Agreements

In addition to treaties, which may not enter into force and become binding on the United States without the advice and consent of the Senate, there are other types of international agreements concluded by the executive branch and not submitted to the Senate. These are classified in the United States as executive agreements, not as treaties, a distinction that has only domestic significance. International law regards each mode of international agreement as binding, whatever its designation under domestic law.
3 Briefing on Treaties
​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

regardless of what wingnut blogs and talking points say:

Executive Agreements

In addition to treaties, which may not enter into force and become binding on the United States without the advice and consent of the Senate, there are other types of international agreements concluded by the executive branch and not submitted to the Senate. These are classified in the United States as executive agreements, not as treaties, a distinction that has only domestic significance. International law regards each mode of international agreement as binding, whatever its designation under domestic law.

The challenge of obtaining two-thirds vote on treaties was one of the motivating forces behind the vast increase in executive agreements after World War II. In 1952, for instance, the United States signed 14 treaties and 291 executive agreements. This was a larger number of executive agreements than had been reached during the entire century of 1789 to 1889. Executive agreements continue to grow at a rapid rate.

In recent years, the growth in executive agreements is also attributable to the sheer volume of business conducted between the United States and other countries, coupled with the already heavy workload of the Senate. Many international agreements are of relatively minor importance and would needlessly overburden the Senate if they were submitted as treaties for advice and consent. Another factor has been the passage of legislation authorizing the executive branch to conclude international agreements in certain fields, such as foreign aid, agriculture, and trade. Treaties have also been approved that authorize further agreements between the parties. According to a 1984 study by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, "88.3 percent of international agreements reached between 1946 and 1972 were based at least partly on statutory authority; 6.2 percent were treaties, and 5.5 percent were based solely on executive authority."
3 Briefing on Treaties
​

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Clearly, you don't understand the Logan Act.

Do you?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So what is the Logan Act? Unless you're familiar with rarely used, early American laws, you may have never heard of it.

It reads:

"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.

"This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects."

Why The GOP Iran Letter Is Spurring Debate Over An 18th Century Law The Two-Way NPR


--------------------

A felony punishable by fine and three years in prison. What do you think? After what they've done to this president and to the country, should they be prosecuted?

So how did they violate the Logan act?

read the law and it's history. It really doesn't matter though since if it were challenged it would probably not hold up.

the hypocrisy is conservatives have been charging liberals violate the Logan Act whenever it suits their fancy

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

In this instance, with much of Congress not trusting this President to negotiate a nuclear treaty with Iran that would be in the best interests of the United States...

...

Oh! It's about the best interests of the US and the interests of Israel?

Ok. I guess that is why Netanyahu was invited

Did I say anything about Israel or Netanyahu?

And, cannot the interests of the United States and Israel overlap or coincide, in this context?

Many believe this to be the case.

The GOP invited Netanyahu to speak before the Congress. breaking all rules of protocol by sidestepping the President. Nettie ws invited to address Iran as a threat to back up the GOP talking point you are pushing. So please, you mentioned Nettie indirectly and without a fuller context you are just posting bumper sticker slogans

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yea it sure is great the the Republicans are willing to screw up any agreement with Iran...

....

Newsflash, mine good colleague... there never WAS a 'deal'... there never COULD have been a 'deal'... Iran wants nukes... all they were ever doing is stalling.

Kondor3 's crystal ball has been known to be cloudy, cloudy, cloudy

When the Supreme Leader of the Iranian religious autocracy publicly denounces the terms announced by the United States, to be inaccurate, and/or a downright lie, well...

And given that we are dealing with religious fanatics who routinely encourage martyrdom and who are aggressively pursuing Shia Militarism throughout the region...

Well, mine good colleague, it doesn't really take much of a crystal ball to predict such things (as a No-Deal scenario) in advance, does it?

Pretty much what the Pubs expected of the Iranian ayatollahs all along.

That's not crediting them with an over-abundance of ability to predict the future...

Just more common sense than your average fourth-grade elementary school unicorns-and-rainbows school-child...

Something regrettably and embarrassingly lacking in the Obumbe Administration... in either the White House OR the State Department...

Your boy screwed the pooch, the Pubs called it, and now you're upset...

As you should be...

But at the wrong people...

again

what did you predict right before the 2012 Presidential election?

 

[Kondor3]

...Unless of course you think the Congress has the power to make and undermine treaties and hold their own negotiations with foreign governments.

Nope. Never said so. Never believed so.

But the Senate has the right of advice and consent with respect to treaties, and withholding of 'consent' serves as a 'legislative veto' of a President's actions, and, when coupled with the Power of the National Purse, as held by the House, this makes the President accountable to the Congress de facto, with respect to treaties.

...

...

You say no, but then you go and contradict yourself.

You lost me...

you lost yourself

Executive Agreements

In addition to treaties, which may not enter into force and become binding on the United States without the advice and consent of the Senate, there are other types of international agreements concluded by the executive branch and not submitted to the Senate. These are classified in the United States as executive agreements, not as treaties, a distinction that has only domestic significance. International law regards each mode of international agreement as binding, whatever its designation under domestic law.
3 Briefing on Treaties
​

Oh, so that's what you were driving at... OK... I haven't been paying the closest of attention to this thread since it began to cool off, and I'd forgotten... OK.

That said...

All the more reason, to make it plain to the Neanderthal ayatollahs in Iran, that the United States will not honor any Bad Deal with Iran, once Obumble leaves office.

 

[Kondor3]

Yea it sure is great the the Republicans are willing to screw up any agreement with Iran...

....

Newsflash, mine good colleague... there never WAS a 'deal'... there never COULD have been a 'deal'... Iran wants nukes... all they were ever doing is stalling.

Kondor3 's crystal ball has been known to be cloudy, cloudy, cloudy

When the Supreme Leader of the Iranian religious autocracy publicly denounces the terms announced by the United States, to be inaccurate, and/or a downright lie, well...

And given that we are dealing with religious fanatics who routinely encourage martyrdom and who are aggressively pursuing Shia Militarism throughout the region...

Well, mine good colleague, it doesn't really take much of a crystal ball to predict such things (as a No-Deal scenario) in advance, does it?

Pretty much what the Pubs expected of the Iranian ayatollahs all along.

That's not crediting them with an over-abundance of ability to predict the future...

Just more common sense than your average fourth-grade elementary school unicorns-and-rainbows school-child...

Something regrettably and embarrassingly lacking in the Obumbe Administration... in either the White House OR the State Department...

Your boy screwed the pooch, the Pubs called it, and now you're upset...

As you should be...

But at the wrong people...

again

what did you predict right before the 2012 Presidential election?

No, Dante, it's not screwy...

It's dead on target... entirely rational, and very common-sense -focused in nature.

It really did not require a crystal ball, to predict that those dikkwads in Tehran would repudiate anything even remotely representing an actual agreement preventing them from acquiring nuclear weapons...

And I have no idea what you are referring to, in connection with me and the 2012 general election...

Especially in light of the fact that I voted for Obumble, as a lesser evil than Mittens (Mister Forty-Seven Percent)...

Non sequitur.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So what is the Logan Act? Unless you're familiar with rarely used, early American laws, you may have never heard of it.

It reads:

"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.

"This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects."

Why The GOP Iran Letter Is Spurring Debate Over An 18th Century Law The Two-Way NPR


--------------------

A felony punishable by fine and three years in prison. What do you think? After what they've done to this president and to the country, should they be prosecuted?

Considering Obama negotiated without the permission of the congress then Obama should be put in jail. The only problem with that is that the citizenship status of Obama might become a plausible defence.

again