jimahrens Loc: California

Wake up People there never was a Deal to begin with. Another ass saving cover up. When are you people going to get past the propaganda.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

I was referring to the one about Iran questioning the presidents citizenship. Sorry for the confusion.

But yes, I'll say they are traitors, undermining a legitimate negotiation. At the very least, breaking the law.

Loki Loc: Georgia

Democrats, also? As a matter of fact, a majority of Democrats. Speaking of the 47 Senators, exactly which law[s] did they break? Since you accuse them of doing so, I'm sure you have one or two in mind.

jimahrens Loc: California

Its the law of Liberals. Is called I said so! So it's true

[quote=Loki]Democrats, also? As a matter of fact, a majority of Democrats. Speaking of the 47 Senators, exactly which law[s] did they break? Since you accuse them of doing so, I'm sure you have one or two in mind.[/quote]

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

[quote=Loki]Democrats, also? As a matter of fact, a majority of Democrats. Speaking of the 47 Senators, exactly which law[s] did they break? Since you accuse them of doing so, I'm sure you have one or two in mind.[/quote]

The Logan Act.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

[quote=Loki]Democrats, also? As a matter of fact, a majority of Democrats. Speaking of the 47 Senators, exactly which law[s] did they break? Since you accuse them of doing so, I'm sure you have one or two in mind.[/quote]

Let me step in here.

The forty seven Senators did not "send" a letter anywhere. They posted the letter on Senator Cotton's website.

If the above is inaccurate, exactly where did they "send" the letter?

jimahrens Loc: California

Has nothing to do with Logan Act

The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 [1948]) is a single federal statute making it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.

Congress established the Logan Act in 1799, less than one year after passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts, which authorized the arrest and deportation of Aliens and prohibited written communication defamatory to the U.S. government. The 1799 act was named after Dr. George Logan. A prominent Republican and Quaker from Pennsylvania, Logan did not draft or introduce the legislation that bears his name, but was involved in the political climate that precipitated it.

In the late 1790s, a French trade embargo and jailing of U.S. seamen created animosity and unstable conditions between the United States and France. Logan sailed to France in the hope of presenting options to its government to improve relations with the United States and quell the growing anti-French sentiment in the United States. France responded by lifting the embargo and releasing the captives. Logan's return to the United States was marked by Republican praise and Federalist scorn. To prevent U.S. citizens from interfering with negotiations between the United States and foreign governments in the future, the Adams administration quickly introduced the bill that would become the Logan Act.

The Logan Act has remained almost unchanged and unused since its passage. The act is short and reads as follows:

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.

The language of the act appears to encompass almost every communication between a U.S. citizen and a foreign government considered an attempt to influence negotiations between their two countries. Because the language is so broad in scope, legal scholars and judges have suggested that the Logan Act is unconstitutional. Historically, the act has been used more as a threat to those engaged in various political activities than as a weapon for prosecution. In fact, Logan Act violations have been discussed in almost every administration without any serious attempt at enforcement, and to date there have been no convictions and only one recorded indictment.

One example of the act's use as a threat of prosecution involved the Reverend Jesse Jackson. In 1984 Jackson took well-publicized trips to Cuba and Nicaragua and returned with several Cuban political prisoners seeking Asylum in the United States. President Ronald Reagan stated that Jackson's activities may have violated the law, but Jackson was not pursued beyond a threat.

The only Logan Act indictment occurred in 1803. It involved a Kentucky newspaper article that argued for the formation in the western United States of a separate nation allied to France. No prosecution followed.Logan act.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

The following forum has some discussion in the posted article concerning the Logan Act. And, yes, the forum is mine.


http://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-35767-1.html


Sent from my iPad

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

True, but in this day and age, it is essentially the same as putting it in their hands.

And yet, it might be technically that they didn't directly interfere, but if they take that position, that they were not interfering, then who were they posturing for? Voters of course. Either way, it was a low life thing to do.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Its all true, but the intent is clear, and many laws lack the backbone to be enforceable. However, there are those who think it applies here. If I were on a jury regarding this being tested, I'd say guilty.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

The Logan Act refers to citizens. Yes, these forty seven are citizens; however, were acting as elected Federal Officials of the government, in my personal opinion. Of course, my personal opinion is not worth a pinch of salt in the overall scheme of things. :lol:

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

Mine neither. It sits right next to that other thing we all have one of.

Loki Loc: Georgia

You have never read it. The Logan Act prohibits US citizens from negotiating with foreign powers without the sanction of the US government. Is it your position that a US Senator is not a representative of the US Government? If so, exactly what are they a representative of?


In reality, there have been several instances of Democratic members of Congress openly reaching out to foreign governments in defiance of Republican presidents.

On Monday, The New York Times pointed out three such instances:

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.

In 1984, congressional Democrats sent a letter to Nicaraguan leader Daniel Ortego Saavedra

- See more at: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2015/03/10/msnbc-falsely-claims-no-precedent-congress-defying-president-foreign#sthash.uBOb5mZ7.dpuf

The Logan Act, (18 USC sec 953, was enacted in 1799, in response to George Logan's unauthorized attempts to negotiate with France in 1798. It specifically forbids negotiations with goverments having adversarial postitions with the US by UNAUTHORIZED citizens. United States Senators are NOT "unauthorized." If they don't agree, there is no agreement other than a temporary and easily reversible agreement. Once more, are you saying that US Senators, including Democrats who have done the same thing far more frequently than Republicans, are not representatives of the US government? They are supposed to possess equal authority with the president. It is called checks and balances. There has been one person charged under the Logan Act in 216 years since it was enacted. That was in 1803, and the case was thrown out of court.

Tell me more about the Logan Act. What part did these Senators violate? The part where they were "unauthorized representatives of the US government? They did not enter into any negotiations, so that's out, so what part, exactly, did they violate?


Once more, the definition of treason, as per 18 USC, sec 2381:

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.


If anyone has given aid and comfort to our enemies, it is Obama and Kerry. They have already agreed to let Iran retain 6000 centrifuges, which is about a thousand more than they need to produce weapons grade plutonium. For that matter, any nuclear reactor produces isotopes suitable for weapons. We built one, to show it was possible.

Since 1979, Iran has broken pretty much every treaty and agreement they have entered into. I have not been able to find one they have honored for any longer than they had to. Why should now be any different? They do not want peace, or peaceful nuclear power. They want weapons. Negotiations are simply a ploy for them to obtain a little wiggle room.

I digress; once more, exactly how did they violate the Logan Act?

Loki Loc: Georgia

Giving the Iranians the means to obtain nuclear weapons is the low life thing. That is what Obama and Kerry's appeasement of Iran is doing. Did you not read the post? The last letter was sent to Obama, opposing his giving away the store. It was not only signed by "47 Republicans," it was also signed by more than 30 of the 44 Democrats in the Senate. Well over half. I suppose they are low life also?

Loki Loc: Georgia

Fortunately, almost every Supreme Court Justice in the past 216 years disagrees with you. I suppose they are not representatives of the goverment either. You would hold Obama blameless if he was caught red-handed selling our nuclear codes to the Iranians while raping an underage sheep. Obama will guarantee a nuclear armed Iran. They already have the centrifuges and are being allowed to keep them. They are getting billions in aid in return for a promise to "be good," which they have no intention of honoring any longer than they absolutely have to. They are funding terrorist who are killing Americans as I write this, and wringing concessions from the most inept negotiator since the Paris Peace Talks of the seventies.