GOP's most recent version of Treason Lite

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

Inviting a foreign leader to speak AGAINST the foreign policy of our President, which is what this is, is UNACCEPTABLE


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-state-of-the-union-obama-takes-credit-as-republicans-push-back/2015/01/21/dec51b64-a168-11e4-b146-577832eafcb4_story.html

Republicans in Congress moved quickly Wednesday to reject many of President Obama’s proposals from the State of the Union address — and invited the prime minister of Israel to rebut Obama’s Iran policy from the same congressional podium next month.

That invitation to address Congress, extended by House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, marked a sharp rejection of Obama’s plea for Congress to stay out of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. If Congress votes to sanction Iran, Obama had warned, it could upset delicate and long-running talks.

Go ahead and show me where this has EVER happened before...go ahead


Jesus, ALL ALL ALL about race...ALL

[GGJohn]

1. Stupid? Absolutely!!!!

Treason in any way? Not even close!!!!

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

2. P.S. If you chickenshit chickenhawks who are inviting a foreign leader to OPPOSE our president

on something that could involve war (you cant get any closer to the definition of treason) then all you war lovers need to go here and make sure your children go here and sign up


http://www.goarmy.com/

[onecaliberal]

3. Democratic reps and senators should skip it.

It is the epitome of pathetic. Middle eastern terrorists want us dead because we cannot stop killing them and supporting other countries who kill them as well. Why do we give Israel billions and then starve our own children.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

4. You cant invite a foreign leader to oppose the CIC, treason lite, absolutely

[GGJohn]

6. Where in the Constitution does it say that? eom

[1bigdude]

5. What exactly does this have to do with race, as you claim? Just askin' NT

[starroute]

54. This wouldn't dare show this kind of blatant disrespect if Obama was white

I don't entirely agree with the OP. I think the GOP has been pushing the boundaries of acceptable behavior for years. But racism certainly factors into it.

[onecaliberal]

90. What are you talking about?

[Enrique]

7. breach of protocol maybe

treason not so much

[GGJohn]

8. Egregious breach of protocol definitely, agreed,

but not treason in any way, shape, or form.

[liberal from boston]

55. John Boehner

Lawrence O'Donnell had an excellent segment with guest Phyllis Bennis. Really interesting to learn that Bibi & Israel Ambassador were lobbying Congress for Israel Prime Minister to address joint session of Congress. Need to watch--it is only about 5 minutes--especially Phyllis Bennis comments.


http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/boehner--not--poking-anyone-in-the-eye--387470915535

[madokie]

9. I'll say it again

Let there be no mistake, the rub the republiCONs have with President Obama is, he is a black man.

I've been saying this from day one, as soon as he was the front runner the pukie knives came out. It was like we'd been invaded by a foreign entity

I hate to sound like a broken record but we have two problems, one is racism, the other is corporate owned media. If we don't get these two under control we lose, what we don't really have now except in name only and thats our Democracy

[Fred Sanders]

10. Creeping step by step to treason, creeping fascism in America is laying the groundwork.

Call it what you like, it is more than disrespectful and a breach of all diplomatic protocol and it is undermining the elected government in charge of international diplomacy and negotiation with Iran, and if you think it all a petty thing, then whose side are you on?

Are you with Obama and the State Department or with the GOP?


http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.ca/2014/02/creeping-fascism-or-maybe-its-just-me.html

"But the worst is not that. The worst is in the mind of people: they have accepted all this as normal and inevitable, they have embraced, whether consciously or not, the kind of creeping Fascism which permeates all of US society, on the streets and in the minds of the people.

People have accepted that we have to act like door-mats by identifying ourselves as soon as told to do so, we have to strip as soon as told so, we have to obey, move, stop, assemble, disperse, move left, move right and always always submit to any order given to us. And all that in the name of security."

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

22. But just calm down Fred, just calm down, so what if the right does shit that was

unthinkable before a BLACK man was in the WHITE house.

Just calm down, nothing to see here unless it is in reverse then you would hear about NOTHING else

This is yet another example, add this one to the PUTIN love in these motherfuckers do on a regular basis.

Can you

IMAGINE

if mCcAIN OR THAT FUCK Romney was prez and the DEMS came out in love with PUTIN

[Fred Sanders]

25. I am disgusted with the the cheerleading for failure media that only knows how to generate fear.

The European experience of Fox revealed them all to be PR reps for the GOP, but still they feel no shame.

And the Obama seminal moment at the STOTU that they refuse to show much for fear of revealing their own incompetence is just as revealing.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

26. I am disgusted with hearing shit on DU that I should only be hearing elsewhere

[Fred Sanders]

27. I hear you. Some can sense the creeping fascism and theocratic ideology, others have had their

senses and common sense purposely blunted.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

28. I just ran into an OP which I thought I would ONLY see on rightwing rag boards

about 529 college savings plans

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

29. He is trying to negotiate PEACE with a country who could NUKE us or someone else and GOP

is PURPOSELY INTERFERING WITH THAT NEGOTIATION


Dear god ,what else do you people need.

And one of the reasons they are interfering, because they want to preserve a place for JESUS to return

[joshdawg]

48. It's a pity that so many here on DU

find it so difficult to understand what your stance is.
Let's call it treason lite, because that's what it sounds like to me also.
What the GOTP is doing is also uncalled for, unprofessional, disrespectful and yes,
even war-mongering.
Wonder what they would have done if the President was white.
Actually, I already know that..............nothing.
Kudos for your post NJNP.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

49. If there was a term for treason lite, that they would be more comfortable with, I would have used

it.

Problem is we are getting used to unprecedented disrespect for that man that includes foreign policy, shit that NEVER happened before

Long list of it too...

Remember, these motherfuckers (gop) were against Obama when he brought home a POW

[1bigdude]

11. I never really bought the whole "they disagree with him because of his race" bit. It's quite

possible that they simply don't agree with his policies. That being said, it's fairly obvious that there is no major differences between the two parties' leaders at the national level.

[brush]

14. HUH? Just because you never "bought"it doesn't make it not so.

Most people around here give a lot of credence to the race bit because it's been in our face and the president's face for years.

Look closer, maybe take off the shades or something because the race bit is so there it's glaring, and there are major differences between the party that carries water for the 1% and passes Citizen's United and the other party that finally gets a healthcare law passed that helps the 99%.

Welcome to DU, btw, and fasten your seat belt because you're in for some bumpy nights with those views.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

23. You are wasting your time, racism is 99.9% of opposition to Obama from the right

and for ANYBODY to say they never bought that, well you might as well go slam your head over and over and over into a brick fucking wall

[brush]

65. Thank you. Makes you wonder about posters who deny that. nt

[jwirr]

46. Using your theory try explaining why when he proposes programs that they have supported such

as ACA - the medical program in MA model - they are now against it. And that has happened in a lot of areas. Why are they against their own ideas the minute he also wants them?

[YarnAddict]

12. And if the Dems had done this

while Boooooooooosh was President, you'd have been cheering them on.

This isn't treason - it's politics. It also has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with politics. As they say, politics ain't beanbag.

[1bigdude]

13. Oh, I'd never cheer for Mr. Bush or the gop. Just think that the constant "it's because of race" bit

wore thin a long, long time ago.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

24. The point is the dems dont do this, just like with Putin, or interefering with Obama all the time

with foreign policy, this is new as of the teaparty

If the dems did this

FUCK

that is the whole god damn point

[karynnj]

31. The point is that they absolutely never did this

Can YOU imagine the outrage had the Democrats invited the leaders of France and Germany to make the case NOT to go to war with Iraq? A great time for this would have been at the point in February 2003 when Bush, Blair and the PM Aznar of Spain met in the Canary Islands and announced the coalition that was to fight Iraq. They were suppose to return to the UN for authorization -- but the French were on record that they would veto it.

Remember this was the time of Freedom Fries and comments that a leading Democrat "looked French" - which was mysteriously suddenly a bad thing.

( As it was we controlled neither House of Congress then - so we would have not had the opportunity given Netanyahu.)

[Nuclear Unicorn]

15. Calm down.

Congress is a co-equal branch of government. The President has exactly ZERO say over who is invited.

Likewise, the action(s) of Congress have exactly ZERO impact on the President's foreign policy prerogatives.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

18. No, wont calm down, this act of treason lite pisses me off, should piss off everybody

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. They're co-equal branches of government. It's a feature, not a bug or a break.

[tritsofme]

16. "Treason light"? This sounds as ridiculous as the nonsense from tea partiers

[ColesCountyDem]

47. Exactly!

Some either is or is not treason, the definition of which is found in Article III, Section 3, Clause 1.

[former9thward]

17. From the government's own website:

Including Petro Poroshenko, President of Ukraine, 110 leaders or dignitaries have addressed Joint Meetings of Congress. (Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela, and Yitzak Rabin have addressed Congress multiple times.)

http://history.house.gov/Institution/Foreign-Leaders/Fast-Facts/


Perhaps you should look up the definition of treason. Hint: Art III, Section 3, Part 1 of the Constitution.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

20. Treason lite, as this clearly is, giving credence to a voice that is in direct opposition to

our foreign policy which could result in war.

It is being done intentionally to interfere with talks of peace, aiding and comforting a foreign leader who wants to interfere with that peace, well let me assure you if the Democrats did this we would NEVER hear the end of it, but because the vicious ugly racist puke fuck teaparty republican assholes are doing it, no big deal

[former9thward]

40. Is this treason lite?

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee opposing Obama's foreign policy.

“The more I hear from the administration and its quotes, the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Iran,” said Sen. Robert Menendez , the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, at Wednesday’s hearing on sanctions. “And it feeds to the Iranian narrative of victimization, when they’re the ones with original sin.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/senators-press-on-iran-sanctions-despite-obamas-veto-threat-1421861534?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsForth&cb=logged0.2459735651500523

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

42. If he is one who is inviting a foreign leader to speak out in OPPOSITION to our efforts at

peace, the absolutely.

HUGE difference between taking a position and then INVITING A FOREIGN LEADER to OFFICIALLY SPEAK in DIRECT OPPOSITION to our god damn COMMANDER IN CHIEF

[onenote]

56. When Congress sought to cut off funding for the Vietnam War

was that treason (or treason "light&quot ?

The answer, of course, is no.

Congress and the President both have roles to play with respect to foreign policy. If Congress passes a law imposing sanctions it doesn't make it treasonous because the President doesn't agree. The President can veto it. And if Congress refuses to enact sanctions a President wants? Same thing. Not treason.

Yes, it was a breach of protocol and an obnoxious one at that. But that's a far cry from being some form of "treason."

[karynnj]

33. The norm is that the WH is part of the process and the invitation

is discussed by the two heads of government.

I agree that it is not treason, but it is a breach of protocol and is intended to attack the President.

Luckily for Israel, Obama is NOT like Netanyahu. If he were, it would quickly be apparent that there are things that affect Israel that the executive branch controls. Like our UN veto. Like the actual disbursal of funds.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

43. Exactly why I added "lite" to the accusation, it is basically the closest you can get without

outright advocating against the Commander in Chief about WAR

[onenote]

58. Back to my question

If outright advocating against a Commander in Chief about war is treason in your view, then you must think that the members of Congress that voted to cut off funding for the Vietnam War, or that voted against the Iraq war resolution were engaging in treason.

Except you probably don't think that (hopefully).

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

59. Get back to me when you can point out where they invited, OFFICIALLY a FOREIGN LEADER to

speak out AGAINST the CIC efforts at peace.

Now, Nixon did commit treason to get elected, common knowledge, but he was a republican

[ND-Dem]

19. so the GOP = the Israel Lobby these days, is it?

[NuclearDem]

30. This is not treason.

Not Treason Lite, New Treason, or Treason Classic.

It's a breach of protocol and total dickbaggery, though.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

32. Purposely trying to prevent peace with a country who could nuke us isnt even treason lite?

REALLY

going out of your way to help and give credibility to a person who wants to STOP that peace and risk war, isnt even LITE in your mind?

If the GOP is successful in preventing peace and war breaks out, then?

[NuclearDem]

34. The fuck are you on about?

In what reality would Israel launch a nuclear attack on the US?

Was there some American-Israeli war that started when I wasn't looking?

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

35. No, no no no no no, IRAN is who we want peace with, the person the GOP pricks are inviting

to speak is AGAINST peace with IRAN

Republicans in Congress moved quickly Wednesday to reject many of President Obama’s proposals from the State of the Union address — and invited the prime minister of Israel to rebut Obama’s Iran policy from the same congressional podium next month.

The CIC is negotiating peace with IRAN, the GOP intentionally invites a FOREIGN leader to OPPOSE that peace ON OUR SOIL in an OFFICIAL MANNER

[NuclearDem]

37. My mistake.

Still not treason in any way, shape or form. Also would love to know how Iran would "nuke us" without any nuclear weapons or delivery systems.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

39. Dont do that, please, tell me you think purposely interfering with peace negotiations isnt

treason lite, I will insist that it is but dont pretend that Iran isnt seeking to become a nuclear power as weapons go, and that this is the whole point of negotiating with them so they DONT and that risk does not have to be faced.

Thank you in advance ...

Unless you think Iran has no interest in nuke weapons and this is not an issue and the Prez is wasting his time?

[NuclearDem]

41. I think you may have had a wee bit too much coffee this morning.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

44. Yeah, I am the problem...Not the GOP who are breaking records at disprespecting the GOP

in matters of WAR AND PEACE


Me, I am the problem

got it

[onenote]

68. Heaven help us if we're now opposed to one side "disrespecting" the President in matters of war and

peace.

There was a lot of disrespect shown by some Democrats to bush's foreign policy and war lust. It never would have occurred to me that some DUers would be of the view that everyone in the legislative branch is required to bend over backwards to not express a view counter to that of the chief executive.

If instead of having Netanyahu speak before a joint session, he had been invited to testify at a hearing on whether or not to impose sanctions, would that been substantively (not merely optics, but actual substance) different?

And while we're at it, I sure as hell hope you don't think that its was traitorous (or near traitorous) when the Democrats pushed through sanctions against the South African government over the objections of Reagan.

[2naSalit]

67. I'm certain there is some term for this

and perhaps even a legal charge could be made but treason may not be appropriate term:

Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii#section3

Explanation w/footnotes:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/art3frag60_user.html#art3_sec3

[1bigdude]

36. Opposition between both houses and the presidency are nothing new...and there's absolutely nothing

with the current leadership actions of both parties to indicate racism. It's a weak case.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

38. I know there is an ignore switch here somewhere

[1bigdude]

45. don't care too much for differing viewpoints, I take it? Sorry to offend! nt

[jwirr]

50. Need some facts. Has congress ever asked a foreign leader to address them without using the

protocol of informing the President first? Is this new?

Also has Congress interfered in negotiations between our government and another like this? This is why we have a President and a Secretary of State. They are undermining that authority and they may not know it but they are also undermining the support for Israel in this country.

I would like to see the Democrats refuse to come. Israel also needs to learn that what they are doing here is not the way we do things. Enough interference in our affairs.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

51. I need to notebook your comment, you said it way better than I could, i am too

emotional about this shit

[jwirr]

53. I hear you. On this one I am torn two ways. I do not like the insulting way they are dealing with

the President but I also support Israel. So it was hard but since I think this is hurting Israel also I said what I felt.

[onenote]

62. How is inviting Netanyahu "interfering" with negotiations?

Its a speech. On a subject over which there is division in Congress. Some (on the right but also some Democrats) want to impose sanctions on Iran. Some want to follow the President's lead. I prefer the latter course, but its ridiculous to characterize one side or the other on a debate such as this as treasonous. Just as it was ridiculous when some on the right claimed it was treasonous for members of Congress to defy Nixon and try to cut off funding for the Vietnam war.

Obnoxious breach of protocol? Sure. But that's it.

[jwirr]

63. I did not say that I thought it was treason. I think it is down right insulting.

[mariawr]

52. Seditious lot, those Republicans. No bar too low for them. nt

[lobodons]

57. Treason Dinner on Day One

Treason is nothing new to the GOP. It started on Day one of Obama's administration when they held their Treason Dinner on the night of his first inauguration.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

60. Yep, that was more just outright crimes, really. Knowingly trying to destroy the economy

[lark]

61. One of the two most heinous things Boner has done as speaker.

The other was closing the government. Wonder if Obama can stop the murderer from comiing? If not, and I'd bet he can't, then just veto anything the stupid neocons send you to escalate tensions with Iran. Bibi is a murdering liar and absolutely beneath contempt.
Dems should, at a minimum, not go. Better to go and harass Bibi with embarassing questions, like the CIA says these claims are totally false, why should we believe you. You also lied about WMD in Iraq, why is still any different? Things like that. He doesn't deserve normal courtesy.

[Agnosticsherbet]

64. This does not fit the Constitutional and legal definiiton of Treason. He did this 2012, 2011, 1996

In fact many heads of state have addressed joint sessions of Congress.

It is not treason to have some other head of state speak against a Presidents foreign policy.

Netanyahu, addressing Congress, lays out vision for Mideast peace

and 2012

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addresses Congress

Other joint addresses of Congress by an Israeli head of state

and on July 10, 2010

January 28, 1976 Joint meeting Address Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of Israel

September 18, 1978 Joint session Middle East peace agreements Attended by Anwar El Sadat, President of Egypt
And Menachem Begin, Prime Minister of Israel

November 10, 1987 Joint meeting Address Chaim Herzog, President of Israel

July 26, 1994 Joint meeting Addresses Hussein, King of Jordan
Yitzhak Rabin, Prime Minister of Israel

December 12, 1995 Joint meeting Address Shimon Peres, Prime Minister of Israel

July 10, 1996 Joint meeting Address Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel

May 24, 2006 Joint meeting Address Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister of Israel


CHECK OUT THE LIST OF JOINT SESSIONS TO SEE HOW MANY TIMES THIS HAS HAPPENED.

[1bigdude]

66. So using the OP's logic, all of these cases are examples of racism, no? Nt

[Agnosticsherbet]

78. It appears that this is just about politics, American and Israeli, not treason or racism

I put a link in my previous remark that lists all joint sessions of Congress, and it can be seen that many other heads of state have, at times, addressed a joint session. Because this has happened by other Congresses and other Presidents, I don't think there is a case where this is just racism and it certainly isn't treason.

Republicans want to appeal to lobbyists who support the State of Israel and want US Policy to continue to be pro Israeli. Republicans are not that opposed to the bulk of American Foreign policy. They want to talk less and rattle the sabre more. But with them drawing up an authorization for the use of force against the IS, they are on exactly the same page with President Obama, and that is to unleash the dogs of war.

Netanyahu wants to get the support of Congress and the Senate because he knows that they are the ones who will continue to fund military and economic aid to Israel. He has had close ties with the American right since 1996. No matter what else people say about him, he is a brilliant politician and knows exactly what he is doing and how to make the American Right do as he wishes. And he also wants the forum to show that he continues to have Israel's special relationship with the US, even if it is not with the current President.

[arcane1]

79. The OP seems to be replying to every post except yours

[Agnosticsherbet]

80. That's OK. I have been ingnored by professionals.

[SalviaBlue]

69. Thom Hartmann is asking the question: Is John Boehner a traitor?

now on the radio.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

70. Then Thom must be some asshole radical liberal like me

Yeah, I am listening.

[Agnosticsherbet]

81. Thom could answer his own question if he read Article 3 - Section 3 of the Constitution.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

John "Annoying Orange" Boehner is a thoroughly reprehensible excuse for a human being. Reprehensible does not rise to the level of treason.

[SalviaBlue]

83. Using the "treason" word is good way to start the conversation.

If you know Thom Hartmann, you know that he is pretty knowledgeable about the Constitution and he did answer his own question by pointing to the Logan Act as what probably applies in this situation.

[Agnosticsherbet]

86. If it is not treason, so using that word is using a lie to start a conversation.

Many people accept on face value that Thom Harman is telling the truth.

Using "treason" is pure demagoguery, making a false claim.

It doesn't have to be treason to be bad for the nation. We should argue with fact not falsehood.

[onenote]

95. Thom Hartmann is not knowlegable about the Logan Act at all.

See post #89 if you want to know about the Logan Act and why suggesting it applies to Boehner inviting Netanyahu to speak to Congress is absurd.

That doesn't mean Boehner wasn't acting like an asshole by breaching protocol in terms of giving the WH a head's up, but if Hartmann had any legal training and knowledge of the history of the Logan Act (as opposed to having a degree in electrical engineering), he wouldn't be suggesting it was applicable.

[bobclark86]

71. To the trash can this goes...

If you can't stop with the right-wing tendency toward hyperbole with your subject line -- we ain't at war with Israel, last I checked -- I really don't feel like taking you seriously.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

72. Just turn on Thom Hartmann, trash him because he is saying the same thing

[bobclark86]

82. I got enough of the "that's TREASON!!!!1" talk...

when I was protesting the invasion of Iraq. I treat people who throw that word around like those who peddle crank "holistic" cancer treatments, proclaim vaccinations cause autism, think the earth was created in a week 6,000 years ago and don't see man's influence on global warming.

Thom Hartmann, whom I've never heard of before right now because I don't listen to the radio (and probably wouldn't hear him in my redneck area anyway), can fuck off.

Adding you to ignore...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

84. Then he is saying stupid things.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

73. Logan Act, negotiate with foreign governments without authority, 3 yrs in prison...HMM

so not treason, but that

and violation of election law

turn on Thom Hartmann, now I know I am an asshole and an idiot

but then so is Thom Hartmann, which of course he isnt

I may not have stated it as eloquently and precisely with the correct legalize as Thom has, but I had an emotional reaction

[Nuclear Unicorn]

85. Dude --

By/Lloyd Vries/AP/April 4, 2007, 6:26 AM

Pelosi Defies Bush, Meets Syrian Leader

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi challenged the White House on Mideast policy, meeting with Syria's leader Wednesday and insisting "the road to Damascus is a road to peace." The Bush administration criticized the visit, saying she was following a road lined with victims of terror.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pelosi-defies-bush-meets-syrian-leader/

And then there was the time Kerry and Tom Harkin went to Nicaragua in 1985 to make deals with the communist dictator Daniel Ortega.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

87. Apple, meet oranges as to Pelosi, very very different, as to the other I would need more

information and even on it's face it isnt the same thing...

Weird, when I google the Harkin Kerry thing I ONLY get rightwing sites

at least I am trying

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

89. why do you have at your fingertips something Pelosi did 8 years ago?

[onenote]

91. Lamest response ever.

See, there's this thing called the Internet where you can find out all sorts of things.

For example, here's what I found out with just a few taps of my fingertips:

The Logan Act was first enacted into law 216 years ago. In all that time, there has been exactly one indictment and no convictions under the law. There are many who believe it is unconstitutional as written.

Moreover, the idea of a progressive citing the Logan Act is bizarre. You know who has been accused of violating the Logan Act over the years? George McGovern, Jesse Jackson, Nancy Pelosi, Stokely Carmichal, Jim Wright, Jane Fonda. Yet the right wingers who tossed out these accusations never could find any takers for bringing an action under the Logan Act.

Here's what the Department of State has said about the Logan Act, in connection with a visit by George McGovern and others to meet with Cuban officials in Havana in 1975: "The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized
persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953, however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution."

Listening to a foreign official give a speech is even less of an intervention in anything than going over to a foreign country and having discussions with that country's officials. If the latter isn't a Logan Act violation, then having a head of state speak to Congress isn't one either. Hartmann is a poor student of history and law.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

92. I was attacked for mentioning socialism the other day, but people can defend rightwing assholes

while accusing many Democrats of many things, i see, now I know the rules here

[onenote]

93. I guess you have no response to the information provided about the Logan Act

And you were the one that insinuated there was something nefarious about knowing Nancy Pelosi had visited Syria and been pilloried over it. Something many progressives on this board remember quite well.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

94. THOM HARTMANN

brought up Logan Act, I merely mentioned it while I was under attack here bringing up the issue

I didnt mention it until he did....

I dont need the mention of the Logan Act to form an opinion of how completely unprecedented this behavior is, and it is


Called it treason lite because I realize it probably isnt exactly treason, but it is similar and I dont know a better word for this horrific behavour...

That some here and most in GOP hate Obama, that isnt news to me

Obama is treated with the greatest level of disrespect by the GOP, by this action, and this is yet one of many examples...

Like attacking him for getting a POW released...there is a long list

OH and yes

The Act was intended to prohibit United States citizens without authority from interfering in relations between the United States and foreign governments.

sounds exactly like what Boehner is doing

[onenote]

96. Now that you know something about the Logan Act, do you have an opinion on Hartmann's argument

Do you still think his position is "correct legalize"?

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

97. My opinion is the GOP is guilty of crimes, many of them, starting with the day Obama was

elected and they conspired to destroy the American economy.

Is that treason?

Probably not, criminal, yes.

The act of intentionally interfering with the CIC trying to negotiate peace, to bring in a foreign leader to officially present to the government in direct opposition of the CIC, yeah, I see that as a treason lite, lite is added because I know what treason is and I realize you cant make a legal case of treason probably so I add the lite.

Obama is attacked no matter what he does by certain people ...

[onenote]

98. I have no interest in attacking Obama

I have an interest in not loosely throwing around claims that inviting Netanyahu to speak is a crime. Its not a crime just as it would not be a crime if he, or anyone else, was asked to testify at a hearing about whether they thought sanctions were a good idea. Ronald Reagan thought sanctions were a bad idea with respect to his approach to South Africa. Congress passed them. That was a good thing and while I support the President and don't think sanctions on Iran are the way to go, under our system of government it's Congress' perogative to pass laws imposing sanctions, just as they did (rightly) with respect to South Africa.

Pursuing policy objectives with which we strongly disagree still doesn't make doing so criminal, unless you think the Democrats that got together and decided that they could override Nixon's Vietnam policy by withholding funding for that war were criminals. I certainly don't think they were.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

99. Good, then we disagree, we can do that and still come together on election day

[onenote]

88. Who is negotiating with who?

If Netanyahu was invited to testify before a committee of congress considering whether or not to impose sanctions on Iran, would that be "negotiating"? THis is the same thing, only less since he's basically making a statement and there isn't any back and forth discussion as there would be in a hearing.

Hartmann is wrong.

[malaise]

74. This is frightening indeed

Fugg 'em!

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

75. If you can, turn on Hartmann right now, wow, he is angrier than I am

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

76. OH SHIT, HARTMANN SAYS TREASON ALSO, ILL BE DARNED

maybe, he says

I said lite, kinda the same thing

But yeah, I am WAY out on a limb

[arcane1]

77. Isn't the pope supposed to speak to congress about climate change soon?