Obama & the Logan Act

October 10, 2008 at 4:12 pm 3 comments

The Washington Post has this article today:

Obama tried to sway Iraqis on Bush deal

At the same time the Bush administration was negotiating a still elusive agreement to keep the U.S. military in Iraq, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama tried to convince Iraqi leaders in private conversations that the president shouldn’t be allowed to enact the deal without congressional approval.

For more information click here

One of my very favorite political analyst friends points out the following:

Heard of the Logan Act? I found this at www.scoopthat.org:

Obama really did try to play politics with the Iraqi war and our troops. Obama wanted Iraqi officials to stop negotiating with President Bush on the matter of U.S. troop removal until after the elections. Obama does not have the authority to speak for the executive branch of the U.S. government! Hopefully, Obama gets charged for violating the Logan Act, which specifically states no unauthorized U.S. citizen can negotiate on behalf of the executive branch of U.S. government.

Advertisements

Entry filed under: General. Tags: , , , , , , .

Obama bought prime time space? Lies, Slander, Libel – Oh My!

3 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Peter Quinn  |  October 10, 2008 at 5:00 pm

    Hi. I am a long time reader. I wanted to say that I like your blog and the layout.

    Peter Quinn

  • 2. MLong  |  October 10, 2008 at 6:13 pm

    Unfortunately, Since he is already a member of the US Senate, he is exempt on this charge. The precedent has already been set when in 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern visited Cuba. The State Department has already ruled that Senators had the right to engage with foreign governments. If the Logan act had teeth, which it does not, it would require pre-approval by all citizens by the president.

    DIGEST OF UNITED STATES PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 1975, p. 750

    Let’s find a real issue and stop making the party look like a bunch of idiots.

  • 3. rightwingchicky  |  October 10, 2008 at 7:30 pm

    thanks to both of you.

    in reading about the precedent set, i found this:

    There’s some precedent for this, from 1975, when a couple of senators visited Cuba. The U.S. State Department said at the time:

    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 [Logan Act], 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. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: “I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn….” (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975). Senator Sparkman’s contacts with Cuban officials were conducted on a similar basis. The specific issues raised by the Senators (e.g., the Southern Airways case; Luis Tiant’s desire to have his parents visit the United States) would, in any event, appear to fall within the second paragraph of Section 953. Accordingly, the Department does not consider the activities of Senators Sparkman and McGovern to be inconsistent with the stipulations of Section 953

    But . . .and a big one. Conversations are one thing, negotiations are another. And they congressmen mentioned in the precendent stated clearly that they were only there to listen NOT negoitate.

    He should not be involved in trying to do something that could be perceived as halting negotiations before he becomes president. It makes it look like he is doing something shady. If it is not an attempt to have a one up on the Republican party by being able to point out what they are not doing.

    It is also worth noting that no one has been formally brought up on charges with this bill. It is just pointing out more of a stepping outside of the boundaries of what is his current job.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Blog Stats

  • 64,342 hits

%d bloggers like this: