TRAITORS

[regexcellent]

Nobody broke any laws.

Senators are allowed to disagree with the president, even on foreign policy matters, it's why they get to decide whether treaties are ratified. They are even allowed to communicate such disagreements with foreign governments.

State governments have even less explicit role in foreign policy but governors go on overseas trips to meet with foreign leaders all the time; it's expected of them these days.

If anyone's a "traitor" it's Obama what with doing his very best effort to cuddle up to our enemy and cut the legs out of sanctions.

[Thoth]

Nobody broke any laws.

Senators are allowed to disagree with the president, even on foreign policy matters, it's why they get to decide whether treaties are ratified. They are even allowed to communicate such disagreements with foreign governments.

State governments have even less explicit role in foreign policy but governors go on overseas trips to meet with foreign leaders all the time; it's expected of them these days.

If anyone's a "traitor" it's Obama what with doing his very best effort to cuddle up to our enemy and cut the legs out of sanctions.

Why do you hate freedom so much?

[regexcellent]

When did you stop beating your wife?

[kentonio]

Nobody broke any laws.

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.

Yes they broke a law. The supreme court long ago upheld the authority of the President to negotiate with foreign powers on behalf of the US nation, and these senators just tried to sabotage negotiations (by their own admission) with a hostile foreign power.

Senators are allowed to disagree with the president, even on foreign policy matters, it's why they get to decide whether treaties are ratified. They are even allowed to communicate such disagreements with foreign governments.

They can shout in the streets, write editorials in the papers, appear on TV and dance naked in the streets shouting WE HATE OBAMA! if it floats their boat, but no, by law they cannot communicate with a foreign government with the intention of disrupting negotiations. It's illegal as ****.

State governments have even less explicit role in foreign policy but governors go on overseas trips to meet with foreign leaders all the time; it's expected of them these days.

And if they do so with the intention of sabotaging US government negotiations, they are commiting an illegal act.

If anyone's a "traitor" it's Obama what with doing his very best effort to cuddle up to our enemy and cut the legs out of sanctions.

Please stop being a fucking ******.

[Thoth]

When did you stop beating your wife?

after she got a restraining order.

[regexcellent]

Yes they broke a law. The supreme court long ago upheld the authority of the President to negotiate with foreign powers on behalf of the US nation, and these senators just tried to sabotage negotiations (by their own admission) with a hostile foreign power.

I don't get how you're reading the second statement from the first.

In any case, their ability to sabotage negotiations is explicity provided for in the constitution in the form of not ratifying treaties. The Senate is supposed to keep an eye on foreign policy and not give the president a free hand.

They can shout in the streets, write editorials in the papers, appear on TV and dance naked in the streets shouting WE HATE OBAMA! if it floats their boat, but no, by law they cannot communicate with a foreign government with the intention of disrupting negotiations. It's illegal as ****.

The practical distinction between sending a letter and broadcasting it on TV is lost on me and hopefully everyone else.

And if they do so with the intention of sabotaging US government negotiations, they are commiting an illegal act.

I'm struggling to think of what you'd charge them with. Note that you actually need to have a charge for it to be a crime.

Please stop being a fucking ******.

Right back at you.

[kentonio]

I don't get how you're reading the second statement from the first.

Please learn to read. The Logan Act defines a specific action as illegal. These senators just blatently performed that action. Which part of this are you struggling to comprehend?

The practical distinction between sending a letter and broadcasting it on TV is lost on me and hopefully everyone else.

So your argument is that people should be free to ignore not just the spirit of the law, but the letter of the law as well?

In any case, their ability to sabotage negotiations is explicity provided for in the constitution in the form of not ratifying treaties. The Senate is supposed to keep an eye on foreign policy and not give the president a free hand.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the law they just broke.

[DaShi]

I don't get how you're reading the second statement from the first.

In any case, their ability to sabotage negotiations is explicity provided for in the constitution in the form of not ratifying treaties. The Senate is supposed to keep an eye on foreign policy and not give the president a free hand.

Which does not include cavorting with hostile nations. This is clearly beyond the scope of their power. That they have other means expressing their displeasure at the agreement only makes their act of treason even worse.

[DaShi]

It's sickening how people are treating this like a partisan issue.

[Berzerker]

They can shout in the streets, write editorials in the papers, appear on TV and dance naked in the streets shouting WE HATE OBAMA! if it floats their boat, but no, by law they cannot communicate with a foreign government with the intention of disrupting negotiations. It's illegal as ****.

Wouldn't all that constitute communicating with a foreign government? Can we the people express our opinions?

[kentonio]

It's sickening how people are treating this like a partisan issue.

Not all thankfully, even Peter ****ing King says he wouldn't have signed it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0...n_6839324.html

[DaShi]

Snowden must be excited about this.

[kentonio]

Wouldn't all that constitute communicating with a foreign government? Can we the people express our opinions?

Not if it was just someone expressing their opinion. The Act only covers 'correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government' which is why it's so unbelievable that these *******s appear to have gone out of their way to breach it.

[Al B. Sure!]

Iran is doing more to fight ISIS than America is. Just sayin'.

[Berzerker]

Not if it was just someone expressing their opinion. The Act only covers 'correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government' which is why it's so unbelievable that these *******s appear to have gone out of their way to breach it.

it was an open letter, they were expressing their opinion and from what I can tell they spoke the truth - if Obama bypasses the Senate (how is that constitutional?) with an "executive agreement" then it aint a treaty and can be ignored or revoked by the next prez (regardless of the Senate). The law you cited aint relevant, these senators are not carrying on any correspondence or intercourse with Iran. The Logan Act is unconstitutional if its illegal for anyone, much less a senator, to express their opinion about pending treaties or executive agreements etc... Besides, somebody's gotta play tough cop.