Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Sun Jul 05, 2015 1:12 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:18 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: Over there! (last)
18 U.S. Code § 953 - Private correspondence with foreign governments

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.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953

Source
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 744; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(K),Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 5 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 5,35 Stat. 1088; Apr. 22, 1932, ch. 126, 47 Stat. 132).
The reference to any citizen or resident within the jurisdiction of the United States not duly authorized “who counsels, advises or assists in such correspondence with such intent” was omitted as unnecessary in view of definition of principal in section 2. *
Mandatory punishment provision was rephrased in the alternative.
Minor changes of arrangement and in phraseology were made.

Amendments
1994—Pub. L. 103–322substituted “fined under this title” for “fined not more than $5,000” in first par.

18 U.S. Code § 2 - Principals *

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.

(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:19 am
Posts: 3715
Image

_________________
initiated individual


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
Funny how people cry foul when they are guilty of the same thing. :roll:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015 ... acks-iran/

In April, 2007, the Wall Street Journal published an op-ed by right-wing law professor Robert Turner, headlined “Illegal Diplomacy,” declaring that “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may well have committed a felony in traveling to Damascus this week, against the wishes of the president, to communicate on foreign-policy issues with Syrian President Bashar Assad.”

For their part, Democrats, needless to say, thought it was perfectly legitimate for members of Congress to act in opposition to Bush’s foreign policy.

5 times Democrats undermined Republican presidents with foreign
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2561314

7 TIMES DEMOCRATS ADVISED AMERICA’S ENEMIES TO OPPOSE THE PRESIDENT
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... president/

They are ALL hypocrites and yet , they continually get elected . :roll:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:18 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: Over there! (last)
Nixon and Reagan were the most egregious offenders, of course, what with Nixon queering Johnson's peace efforts in Viet Nam and Reagan delaying the Iranian hostage release, so both could be elected President. Peace in Viet Nam would have translated to a Humphrey victory, and a pre-election hostage release would have resulted in a Carter victory.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 6:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 4152
Just have to ask MNG is the previous post humor or are you an idiot?

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 7:35 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 6094
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
What the Republicans did was treason, regardless of who else did what and when. The excuses and trying to shift blame that neo-cons like to do is pathetic. IT'S FUCKING TREASON. HOLD THESE MF'ERS RESPONSIBLE. :roll:


Oh wait, they'll just brew up more fake scandals like Bengazzi, emails and birth certificates like the racists they/you are.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:18 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: Over there! (last)
BRAVO SIERRA wrote:
Just have to ask MNG is the previous post humor or are you an idiot?

I'm clearly not an idiot, while you're clearly an asshole. Fact check me all you want, douche bag.

Image

_________________
Image Nothing is permanent, except change.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 3:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:19 am
Posts: 3715
Q: what is the difference between an asshole and an idiot?
A: i can't ram my cock up your idiot.

Image

_________________
initiated individual


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 4152
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDwQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweaselzippers.us%2F216624-flashback-pelosi-dismisses-criticism-from-bush-after-she-meets-with-assad-in-syria%2F&ei=PTYAVefjDYfSgwTWq4CACQ&usg=AFQjCNHbh4sctIUIXXxKk82PzC08w1n2-A&bvm=bv.87611401,d.eXY&cad=rja So was this treason also

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:18 pm
Posts: 1342
Location: Over there! (last)
Mr. Nice Guy wrote:
Nixon and Reagan were the most egregious offenders, of course, what with Nixon queering Johnson's peace efforts in Viet Nam and Reagan delaying the Iranian hostage release, so both could be elected President. Peace in Viet Nam would have translated to a Humphrey victory, and a pre-election hostage release would have resulted in a Carter victory.

Nixon's sabotage of the Vietnam peace talks was confirmed by transcripts of FBI wiretaps. On November 2, 1968, LBJ received an FBI report saying Anna Chernnault told the South Vietnamese ambassador that "she had received a message from her boss: saying the Vietnamese should "hold on, we are gonna win."

from book reviews of Chasing Shadows and The Nixon Tapes

Late in the 1968 presidential campaign, President Johnson, having forsworn another term, was ready to halt the bombing of North Vietnam to try to revive peace negotiations. Nixon, the Republican nominee, considered the decision a ploy to help Vice President Hubert Humphrey, the Democratic candidate, who was trailing in the polls. So Nixon had his law partner (and later attorney general) John N. Mitchell speak to Anna Chennault, a 43-year-old Chinese-born Republican activist, who in turn spoke to Bui Diem, the South Vietnamese ambassador, who in turn told South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu to reject LBJ’s initiative, promising a better deal once Nixon was elected. This skulduggery arguably violated the Logan Act, which bars private citizens from freelancing in foreign policy.

*****************************

Reagan = October Surprise


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 4152
You are an idiot sheeple, Johnson escalated , and your post admits "arguably" that does not make it a fact or true, focus now.....................this is to day wake the fuck up>http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CEEQqQIwBA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fpeople-comparing-hillary-clinton-to-richard-nixon-2015-3&ei=wDgAVen-EMqfNrqJgZgK&usg=AFQjCNHj1d0unp4htVJQ1LMhJrTIsWRNEw&bvm=bv.87611401,d.eXY

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 4:19 am
Posts: 3715
Image

_________________
initiated individual


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
We might as well show the whole letter, so everyone can decide for themselves how unpatriotic this group of Republicans is.

An Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran:

It has come to our attention while observing your nuclear negotiations with our government that you may not fully understand our constitutional system. Thus, we are writing to bring to your attention two features of our Constitution—the power to make binding international agreements and the different character of federal offices—which you should seriously consider as negotiations progress.

First, under our Constitution, while the president negotiates international agreements, Congress plays the significant role of ratifying them. In the case of a treaty, the Senate must ratify it by a two-thirds vote. A so-called congressional-executive agreement requires a majority vote in both the House and the Senate (which, because of procedural rules, effectively means a three-fifths vote in the Senate). Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement.

Second, the offices of our Constitution have different characteristics. For example, the president may serve only two 4-year terms, whereas senators may serve an unlimited number of 6-year terms. As applied today, for instance, President Obama will leave office in January 2017, while most of us will remain in office well beyond then—perhaps decades.

What these two constitutional provisions mean is that we will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.

We hope this letter enriches your knowledge of our constitutional system and promotes mutual understanding and clarity as nuclear negotiations progress.

Sincerely,

Senator Tom Cotton, R-AR
Senator Orrin Hatch, R-UT
Senator Charles Grassley, R-IA
Senator Mitch McConnell, R-KY
Senator Richard Shelby, R-AL
Senator John McCain, R-AZ
Senator James Inhofe, R-OK
Senator Pat Roberts, R-KS
Senator Jeff Sessions, R-AL
Senator Michael Enzi, R-WY
Senator Michael Crapo, R-ID
Senator Lindsey Graham, R-SC
Senator John Cornyn, R-TX
Senator Richard Burr, R-NC
Senator John Thune, R-SD
Senator Johnny Isakson, R-GA
Senator David Vitter, R-LA
Senator John A. Barrasso, R-WY
Senator Roger Wicker, R-MS
Senator Jim Risch, R-ID
Senator Mark Kirk, R-IL
Senator Roy Blunt, R-MO
Senator Jerry Moran, R-KS
Senator Rob Portman, R-OH
Senator John Boozman, R-AR
Senator Pat Toomey, R-PA
Senator John Hoeven, R-ND
Senator Marco Rubio, R-FL
Senator Ron Johnson, R-WI
Senator Rand Paul, R-KY
Senator Mike Lee, R-UT
Senator Kelly Ayotte, R-NH
Senator Dean Heller, R-NV
Senator Tim Scott, R-SC
Senator Ted Cruz, R-TX
Senator Deb Fischer, R-NE
Senator Shelley Moore Capito, R-WV
Senator Bill Cassidy, R-LA
Senator Cory Gardner, R-CO
Senator James Lankford, R-OK
Senator Steve Daines, R-MT
Senator Mike Rounds, R-SD
Senator David Perdue, R-GA
Senator Thom Tillis, R-NC
Senator Joni Ernst, R-IA
Senator Ben Sasse, R-NE
Senator Dan Sullivan, R-AK

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 4152
Hillary not giving over her server is unpatriotic, the letter above is superfluous to the on going nuke deal. Also in my opinion poor strategy, as well as ineffective and petty but not unpatriotic. if you consider it unpatriotic then pelosi's meeting with assad was as well.

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
I would say that the bottom line is this.

The current asshole in chief should not go into this negotiation alone. PERIOD.
He needs to stop thinking of himself as a ' king with a pen and a phone ' and start obeying the law and limits of his particular branch of our government.

I can't blame the reps that wrote the letter.
At least THEY can work together . :roll:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
SPACEBROTHER wrote:

Oh wait, they'll just brew up more fake scandals like Bengazzi, emails and birth certificates like the racists they/you are.


Care to clarify the red zone ?

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
I consider the following quotes to be unpatriotic:

"Anything not approved by Congress is a mere executive agreement...The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time."

The implication is that the president is not really their president. While its probably a good laugh for them to write "president" and "Congress", the statements sabotage any agreement, no matter what the content, which is, at best, ignorant.

I consider the following quote to be a threat to Iran:
"As applied today, for instance, President Obama will leave office in January 2017, while most of us will remain in office well beyond then—perhaps decades."

They might as well have just wrote: "We hate you and will continue to do so." Shitty diplomacy.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
I would also consider any ' deal ' that is not sanctioned by the US Congress , or a ' deal ' that is agreed upon by only the Executive branch of our government , to be unpatriotic.

Would you also agree that putting this country into 18 trillion in debt is also unpatriotic ?

I'm sure most would agree to that unless they are a hypocrite. :wink:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
Well, I suppose if you nail it to one person, then sure yer debt thing would be unpatriotic. But, the national debt can't be pinned to one person.

But, it looks like you have a belief that nearly any foreign diplomacy is unpatriotic. That's weird. Your wording would result in treason for 2 Heads of State agreeing to meet for dinner the next day.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:11 am
Posts: 4152
pedro is correct, here is the law, if of course you want to follow the constitution, Article 2, section 2, clause 2, the president can NOT make a treaty without discussion and consent from 2/3 of the senate that are present. The Pres says he taught constitutional law, so he knows this article that is why the schmuck is using his penn and phone on this treaty (deal) with iran. And why the congress felt they had to send the letter. I still say it was not necessary imho. Now all you guys bone up on the constitution and we can have a more a accurate debate, i did retained a little from hillsdale college

Clause 2: Advice and Consent Clause

The President exercises the powers in the Advice and Consent Clause with the advice and consent of the Senate.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

_________________
A government Bureau is the closest thing to eternal life on earth that you will ever see


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:
Well, I suppose if you nail it to one person, then sure yer debt thing would be unpatriotic. But, the national debt can't be pinned to one person.


Well , your hero in the white house tried to blame it on one person. His name was Bush.
Was Obama wrong ??? :shock:

The Forum Killed Arkay wrote:
But, it looks like you have a belief that nearly any foreign diplomacy is unpatriotic. That's weird. Your wording would result in treason for 2 Heads of State agreeing to meet for dinner the next day.


Looks like BS already answered that question , didn't he ?

We have 3 branches of government for a reason , silly boy.
:roll:

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
So, Bravo, now you consider the letter to be pointing out important legal information to a foreign country, but in your previous post, its contents were a patriotic but poor strategy? WTF?

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
Put the debt blame wherever YOU want it pedro. In MY opinion, Obama should discuss Bush's problems in the manner of "under Bush's presidency", not, as you have reported, that "putting this country into 18 trillion in debt is also unpatriotic". And before you wet your pants again, yes, "under Obama's Presidency" is equally correct terminology.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 3:22 am
Posts: 1239
You should have shared YOUR opinion with Obama before he spoke about someone being un patriotic.
One more thing , I didn't ' report ' it. The word ' unpatriotic ' came from Obama. Don't you watch the news ??

Funny thing about hypocrites , when someone does or says something they don't like , they cry foul.
When they do the same thing as who they are objecting to , well , that's just politics. :roll:

The Democratic party has lied to almost everybody ( except those on the inside ) about how much they ' care ' and you poor suckers keep voting them in.

Why are Democratic supporters so gullible ? :?

_________________
http://www.ssimfg.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Logan Act
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 5:18 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Between the Badges
You can try to turn the tables and try to make people forget the topic, I'm sure you consider that useful since you'll do anything to avoid admitting that it is not patriotic to hamstring a sitting President's foreign negotiations. Really, you should be able to admit that the letter is unpatriotic. Its obvious. Stop apologizing for The Republican Party.

_________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Don't Be Stupid Unless You Want To


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], SPACEBROTHER and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group