Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This man says he might have. As usual we get opinions.
Alan Lunn
But yesterday's political theater was an end-run around protocol and a usurpation of presidential power by both the Speaker and the foreign prime minister. Nobody here voted for Netanyahu. You guys would be enraged if Pelosi had tried this with Bush.
Not only that, this was done while actual negotiations were being made with Iran, and these negotiations are also going on with other major nations. Is Boehner losing his marbles?
He may actually have committed a felony.
"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." -- The Logan Act
"In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), however, Justice Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion: '[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it.' Sutherland also notes in his opinion the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations report to the Senate of February 15, 1816:
"The President is the constitutional representative of the United States with regard to foreign nations. He manages our concerns with foreign nations, and must necessarily be most competent to determine when, how, and upon what subjects negotiation may be urged with the greatest prospect of success. For his conduct, he is responsible to the Constitution.
Then Churchill made three appearances before our US Congress, asking the people of the USA for help.
This was also Netanyahu's 3rd speech in Congress. Churchill's visits and Netanyahu's first 2 visits were handled properly, while the 3rd visit was reduced to political circus. It's an escalation of silliness, and a waste of taxpayer money, that's all.
This man says he might have. As usual we get opinions.
Alan Lunn
But yesterday's political theater was an end-run around protocol and a usurpation of presidential power by both the Speaker and the foreign prime minister. Nobody here voted for Netanyahu. You guys would be enraged if Pelosi had tried this with Bush.
Not only that, this was done while actual negotiations were being made with Iran, and these negotiations are also going on with other major nations. Is Boehner losing his marbles?
He may actually have committed a felony.
"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." -- The Logan Act
"In United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), however, Justice Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion: '[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it.' Sutherland also notes in his opinion the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations report to the Senate of February 15, 1816:
"The President is the constitutional representative of the United States with regard to foreign nations. He manages our concerns with foreign nations, and must necessarily be most competent to determine when, how, and upon what subjects negotiation may be urged with the greatest prospect of success. For his conduct, he is responsible to the Constitution.
You do know OTHER foreign dignitary's s have spoken before Congress.
"Beginning in the early 19th century, Congress has invited many foreign leaders and dignitaries to give addresses in their Chambers."
"To hold a joint meeting, both the House and Senate declare a recess, either by a resolution or unanimous consent, so they can reconvene together. This became the standard practice beginning with the joint meeting for British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who addressed both the House and Senate in the Senate Chamber on December 26, 1941, a mere three weeks after Pearl Harbor. The Prime Minister came to discuss America’s involvement with the Allied forces in World War II"
They are different branches because they have different roles. The Constitution is clear: Receiving foreign representatives is a duty of a president, not the Congress. Boehner violated the Constitution with this stunt. If it is ok, then future Congresses will follow suit and conduct foreign policy even if it violates the Constitution. Such acts demonstrate little respect for the Constitution, and the way things are handled in the United States.
So charge him and like obama going over the line, ten years of appeals, reversals and interpretation might settle the case. If Eric Holder wasn't imprisoned for judge shopping and lying to get a warrant against James Rosen and Assoc press journalists, inviting a foreign rep is CS.
I didn't say he wasn't. Obama was thrilled to have him come here and bash Arizona. But he also was invited to address Congress for the sole purpose of bashing Arizona's immigration law, so the Dems have zero high ground on this issue.
In fact, they looked like a bunch of whining babies yesterday, with one Dem lawmaker comparing Netanyahu to a child who wants "to go to Disneyland every day and drink Coca Cola."
Way to totally miss the point.
Unless the WH had no foreknowledge of the invitation extended to the Mexican president, these are two totally different situations.
They are different branches because they have different roles. The Constitution is clear: Receiving foreign representatives is a duty of a president, not the Congress. Boehner violated the Constitution with this stunt. If it is ok, then future Congresses will follow suit and conduct foreign policy even if it violates the Constitution. Such acts demonstrate little respect for the Constitution, and the way things are handled in the United States.
The beginning of the thread says the president is "the competent" body.......
Obama I'd anything but competent. Incompetent comes to mind.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
