Obama-Biden Reservations Confirmed

RightinNYC · 09-17-08, 02:57 PM

This could be a much bigger deal if

a) It turns out to be true, and
b) People understand exactly what happened (which is doubtful)

That said, I don't put much faith in this story as of yet.

Gill · 09-17-08, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

No, he is not, if in so doing he's attempting to intervene in the foreign policy of the United States.

Foreign policy is Executive branch, exclusively. The Senate consents to treaty ratification (not negotiation) and the appointment of Executive officers, but that's all they do.

Absolutely correct. But, no one has ever been convicted of breaking the Logan Act and probably never will.

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Objective Voice

Well, nobody said much about Reagan when he negotiated w/Iran not to release the hostages before he was sworn in as president.

1) Lots of people raised a lot of hell about it.

2) There's not a shred of evidence that it was true.

Gibberish · 09-17-08, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

No, he does not have that authority, if in so doing he's attempting to intervene in the foreign policy of the United States.

Foreign policy is Executive branch, exclusively. The Senate consents to treaty ratification (not negotiation) and the appointment of Executive officers, but that's all they do.

So every Senator, or anyone not in the Executive branch even, that has ever spoken with a Foreign government is in violation of the Logan Act?

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill

Absolutely correct. But, no one has ever been convicted of breaking the Logan Act and probably never will.

No, no one has.

But that doesn't mean he didn't break it.

It also doesn't mean he didn't purposely seek to delay bringing troops home for his own political advantage, which pretty much puts paid to everything he ever said on the matter.

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gibberish

So every Senator, or anyone not in the Executive branch even, that has ever spoken with a Foreign government is in violation of the Logan Act?

If they've tried to influence our foreign policy without authorization, yes.

Gill · 09-17-08, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harshaw

No, no one has.

But that doesn't mean he didn't break it.

It also doesn't mean he didn't purposely seek to delay bringing troops home for his own political advantage, which pretty much puts paid to everything he ever said on the matter.

I didn't say this may not turn out to be a huge issue with Obama, and I hope it will. I'm only saying that he will likely not be charged with a felony under the Logan Act.

Goobieman · 09-17-08, 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gibberish

Two things about your post.
1. Since when are Senator's forbidden from negotiating with foreign nations?

Sunce the adoption of the US Constitution.
Foreign policy is the sole purview of the executive branch.

Harshaw · 09-17-08, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill

I didn't say this may not turn out to be a huge issue with Obama, and I hope it will. I'm only saying that he will likely not be charged with a felony under the Logan Act.

The chances of prosecution are quite slim.

But yes, it ought to be a very big issue.

bhkad · 09-17-08, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Objective Voice

Well, nobody said much about Reagan when he negotiated w/Iran not to release the hostages before he was sworn in as president. That one event killed Carter's 2nd bid to the presidency and put Reagan on a path straight to the White House. Of course, this does make Obama look bad when he's been a strong proponant for bringing our troops home. One could argue that it's politics as usual, whereas w/Reagan the other could argue it's a strong-arm tactic to add a feather in his cap after he becomes president...again, much as Reagan did so long ago.

(And mind you, I liked Reagan...still believe to this day he did more to make American's believe in America again than any president since JFK, but you really can't condemn Obama w/o also condeming Reagan for doing the exact same thing.)

Quote:

The problem with what Obama did is twofold. First, Senator Obama has no authority to negotiate on behalf of the executive branch, which has sole authority to conduct foreign policy. Second and most important, Obama attempted to interfere against the interests of the United States. He can ask all the questions he wants, but when Obama started pressing Iraqi officials to stop negotiations with the executive branch — in other words, break one level of diplomatic contact and freeze a military alliance in time of war — that crossed a line and clearly violated the Logan Act. It also makes clear that Obama would do anything to get elected, even harm diplomatic relations between the US and an ally.

Even with the less-effective approach, though, the ad will at least put the issue in front of the American people. So far, the mainstream media seems more interested in Sarah Palin’s tanning bed than in a presidential candidate who tried to undermine US interests in a war zone for the sake of his own political career.

Hot Air Blog Archive MAFPAC ad hits Obama on Iraq interference

Obama "tried to undermine US interests in a war zone for the sake of his own political career."

A new low.

09-17-08, 02:57 PM	#11
RightinNYC GIRTH 2.0 Mod team member Join Date: Mar 2005 Last Seen: Today 02:40 AM Location: New York, NY Posts: 21,261 Thanks: 2,414 Thanked 8,881 Times in 4,439 Posts Lean: Slightly Conservative Gender: Total Awards: 1	Re: Obama-Biden Reservations Confirmed This could be a much bigger deal if a) It turns out to be true, and b) People understand exactly what happened (which is doubtful) That said, I don't put much faith in this story as of yet.
	__________________ People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode