• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did the GOP Senators commit a Treason act against Obama and the Country?

Did the GOP commit a Treason acted, against Obama and the Country ?


  • Total voters
    63
  • Poll closed .
The letter to Iran is not without precedent.

Jim Wright, the Democratic House speaker during Ronald Reagan's presidency, was accused of interfering when he met with opposing leaders in Nicaragua's contra war. Three House Democrats went to Iraq in 2002 before President George W. Bush's invasion to try to head off war. And Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, went to Syria in 2007 to meet with President Bashar al-Assad against the wishes of the Bush administration, which was trying to isolate him. - See more at: MSNBC Falsely Claims No 'Precedent' for Congress Defying President on Foreign Policy

Despite the networks’ eagerness to tout Democratic opposition to the GOP letter, on two separate occasions the “big three” completely ignored a letter penned by former Senator Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) written to the Soviet Union in 1983 aimed at undermining President Ronald Reagan’s nuclear negotiations with the Communist regime. - See more at: Flashback: Big Three Ignored Ted Kennedy

So there you have it. Democrats in congress interjected themselves into foreign policy matters with foreign leaders in Nicaragua, Syria and Russia during nuclear arms negotiations. If Obama would put down the pen and phone and work with congress now that it's under republican control, extrodenary measures like the letter to Iran wouldn't be necessary but he'd rather cut a deal without congressional approval which is favorable to Iran and which fits into his pro Muslim world view.
 
not sure that it's treason, but I read several compelling pieces that it could be a violation of the Logan Act.
 
This from someone who thinks that being in any opposition to Obama is fundamentally wrong. I'm sure your belief is that their "opposition rights" are to STFU and roll over on everything.

That is pure baloney - worse - its yesterdays baloney that has been digested and heading for exit. I said back in 2011 that Obama should NOT run for a second term and have been vocal in my disappointment for his efforts.

So do NOT hide behind the strawman of your own creation on this one.
 
Tell us, if you will, what your opinion of the congressional delegation headed by Nancy Pelosi to go see President Assad to relieve pressure being placed on him by the Bush Administration while he was still aiding in the killing of American servicemembers, secretly attempting to develop nuclear weaponry, and supporting global terrorist organizations was? How full of "blatant disrespect" or "disgusting" would you find those actions?

And you really think these actions are the same thing? :doh:roll:

And the best you can do is a "its our turn - nanananana - you did it so we can too". Amazing!!!!

That sort of partisan knee jerk response is not even worthy of a serious analysis.
 
Treason against Obama? Perhaps ruffling his well preened and cocky feathers a bit. But really, this was in very bad taste and shouldn't have happened.
Of interests is that so many applaud the letter. Did you also applaud Pelosi and Carter going rogue?
 
not sure that it's treason, but I read several compelling pieces that it could be a violation of the Logan Act.

The Logan Act has no bearing on this as it pertains to negotiation. This letter does no negotiating. It simply states a fact.

Also I have a feeling that if this act were to ever be challenged in court it would fail miserably. Free Speech and all that. The fact that its never actually been enforced is why its still around I would imagine.
 
,
And you really think these actions are the same thing? :doh:roll:

And the best you can do is a "its our turn - nanananana - you did it so we can too". Amazing!!!!

That sort of partisan knee jerk response is not even worthy of a serious analysis.

And this is a common deflection when it's been pointed out to someone that they lack outrage when it's done by someone on their "side" and just looking at your first line, your kneejerk reaction was, in essence, "it's not the same thing".
 
All I can say is that if the Democrats pulled a stunt like this when Bush was in office, the Republicans, talk radio hosts, and most of the commentators on Fox News would be calling it treason and would be calling for the trial and execution of every senator that signed the letter.

I don't think its treason though. Just a douchebag thing to do.
 
All I can say is that if the Democrats pulled a stunt like this when Bush was in office, the Republicans, talk radio hosts, and most of the commentators on Fox News would be calling it treason and would be calling for the trial and execution of every senator that signed the letter.

I don't think its treason though. Just a douchebag thing to do.

First of all, the Democrats have pulled stunts like this. Odd that they've escaped your notice and condemnation. That's the thing about claims of hypocrisy, they always cut both ways.

Incidentally, do any of us expect any liberal/Democrat to support this letter? Of course not. It's not some objective analysis though, it's simply a partisan thing.
 
First of all, the Democrats have pulled stunts like this. Odd that they've escaped your notice and condemnation. That's the thing about claims of hypocrisy, they always cut both ways.

Incidentally, do any of us expect any liberal/Democrat to support this letter? Of course not. It's not some objective analysis though, it's simply a partisan thing.

When have virtually the entire Democratic senate delegation wrote a letter to an enemy government in the middle of negotiations with the President to advise that enemy government not to accept any agreement with the president?
 
Ok, fair enough, it does imply that and you're right, there is no doubt as to the intent of the letter. It's to undermine and even attempt to prevent a deal being reached with Iran. I just think you may be over estimating how much people in the US want that deal, especially one negotiated entirely by the Obama administration.

Who got re-elected president in 2012 again?

THERE IS NO DEAL YET. You can't say people don't want it when it doesn't exist.
 
You mean like when Pelosi went to visit Assad in Syria in 2007?

**** Nancy Pelosi, I don't give a rat's ass about her. That was wack when she did it, and this is wack.
 
When have virtually the entire Democratic senate delegation wrote a letter to an enemy government in the middle of negotiations with the President to advise that enemy government not to accept any agreement with the president?

But negotiating some sort of deal with that enemy government without a single shred of Congressional input is totally fine and of zero concern to you. Lol.

You can't make this stuff up.
 
But negotiating some sort of deal with that enemy government without a single shred of Congressional input is totally fine and of zero concern to you. Lol.

You can't make this stuff up.

Yeah, its totally unprecedented for a president to negotiate a deal with an foreign government without congressional approval.... I mean its only happened hundreds of times. As the letter points out, if the Republicans don't like the deal they can simply ignore it if they win the presidency in 2016.
 
Who got re-elected president in 2012 again?

This could not sum up your position on this forum any better. You might as well post that exact line in any political thread about Obama.

THERE IS NO DEAL YET. You can't say people don't want it when it doesn't exist.

I can say definitively that many people do not want any deal with Iran.
 
Yeah, its totally unprecedented for a president to negotiate a deal with an foreign government without congressional approval.... I mean its only happened hundreds of times. As the letter points out, if the Republicans don't like the deal they can simply ignore it if they win the presidency in 2016.

It's funny how when you were speaking about the GOP, they were repeatedly "The enemy government" but talk about Obama making deals with them and now they're just a "foreign government". :lamo
 
Seriously. This is the dumbest thing I have seen the GOP do yet. But I am prepared to see them top this one. Full steam ahead. :roll:
Quite the dumb move. It opens up another avenue of negotiations and allows Iran to play one branch of gov't off of the other.
Why would Iran negotiate if they get a letter delivered that says:

To Whom it May concern:
Just a quick civics lesson since you guys probably never saw School House Rock.
Ya know, any deal that you sign just might be null and void if we can get hold of that White House.
We're just sayin'
Signed, Your Friends in Congress, The Mighty GOP, et al.

Iran can nix the whole deal saying that they don't know who their negotiating with.
They can then press full ahead, sanctions be damned. Someone is always willing to circumvent them to make a buck.
Just keep a record of everyone who signed the letter and watch them back away when the election is in full swing.
And while we're at it, let's invite Bibi over here.
We can fawn all over him, and remove any pressure he might feel to stop the settlements, and help him get re-elected.
What a bunch of Maroons!
 
Howdy MMC. :2wave: Nope. From what I can tell all this fake outrage is just them trying to get the media to stop reporting on what went on with Hillary's email scandal. Pretty standard stuff though no matter what side of the aisle you're on. Make other side look bad while trying to hide the bad in your side. Frankly, I'm sick of it.

Edit: Now that I think about it, another aspect to this that really doesn't surprise me is that they are ignoring that what the letter states is actually true. Which means that once again, they are ignoring the Constitution. A common theme of late. :(


The funny thing is.....Cotton graduated from Harvard. So its not like he wouldn't know what the law is. Plus he knows it way more than BO Peep does.
 
It's funny how when you were speaking about the GOP, they were repeatedly "The enemy government" but talk about Obama making deals with them and now they're just a "foreign government". :lamo

Its funny how when someone doesn't have an argument, they resort to arguing semantics. The fact is, and you know this, had almost all the senate Democrats wrote a letter to a foreign government advising them not to accept any agreement with the Bush administration, the Republicans, Talk Radio Hosts, and virtually all the commentators on Fox News would be calling them traitors and would be calling for the trial and execution as enemies of the state. That is the kind of absurd hyperbole regularly demonstrated on the hardcore right. Hell there are nutters on this very forum arguing we can't trust Obama to negotiate with Iran because of his "Muslim sympathies"

I don't think what the Republicans did was treasonous, but rather just a douchebag thing to do.
 
Not treason, but indicative of what happens when you have a highly polarized group of tea party morons who show their idiocy doing things like this.
 
I can say definitively that many people do not want any deal with Iran.

That would make those people complete and utter fools.

If a good deal is there to be had, it should be taken, but not taking the time to find out is absolutely foolish because the only other alternatives are further sanctions which will not work and war.

Which one are you comfortable with?
 
All I can say is that if the Democrats pulled a stunt like this when Bush was in office, the Republicans, talk radio hosts, and most of the commentators on Fox News would be calling it treason and would be calling for the trial and execution of every senator that signed the letter.

I don't think its treason though. Just a douchebag thing to do.

If you are concerned about douchebaggery, how do you feel about Obama using his pen and his phone to go it alone on a nuclear arms deal with Iran. Do you believe that congress should have a say in the final work product or are you willing to take Obama on face value understanding that his sympathies lie with the Muslim world and his sanctions against Iran are most likely going to eventually let them have a nuclear arsinal.
 
Too bad they ****ed up explaining the treaty process.

From what I read and heard, the letter made no attempt at negotiating a treaty. The letter simply pointed out publicly that Obama on his own did make foreign policy decisions on his own, but required the agreement of Congress. Something I would guess Iranian diplomats already knew.

I think the letter was a good move. It reminded Obama of some facts of politics, and put a stop to, or at least slowed, Obama's man who would be king policies.
 
If you are concerned about douchebaggery, how do you feel about Obama using his pen and his phone to go it alone on a nuclear arms deal with Iran. Do you believe that congress should have a say in the final work product or are you willing to take Obama on face value understanding that his sympathies lie with the Muslim world and his sanctions against Iran are most likely going to eventually let them have a nuclear arsinal.

Your last sentence is exactly why there is no point in Obama trying to involve congress in the negotiations. The party that controls the congress he would have to involve in such negotiations has a base that is so crazy they believe that Obama wants Iran to go nuclear because of his "Muslim sympathies". Given the choice of having the president negotiate an agreement or allowing the input of a bunch of nutjobs, I think we are better off with leaving it to the president. If the deal is bad, the next president can simply ignore it.
 
Back
Top Bottom