Should house Republicans be charged and tried with violation of the Logan act?

[BrainGlutton]

Interesting analysis of why this happened.

But these two factors [the GOP resigned to being a “Congressional party,” and the entrepreneurial career-paths of Pub pols nowadays], important as they are, are not the deepest source of the GOP’s behavior. That is surely the mutation in its idea of government, a mutation that spread through the party as a whole when white Southerners flocked to it after the passage of Civil Rights laws in the mid-1960s. Until that time, the Republican Party, while “conservative” in the spectrum of American politics, largely accepted the modern state constructed by politicians — Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt — of both parties. This state tried to keep private markets free and fair, and imposed minimum standards for the safety and welfare of workers; it sought a stable currency; and it insisted on the equal citizenship of racial, religious, and ethnic minorities. More recently, it worked to extend this status to groups defined variously by gender and/or sexuality.

Republicans might be suspicious of some of these aspirations, and more inclined than Democrats to urge caution and restraint, but in general they regarded the modern state as a necessary compromise with modern life. This began to change in response to the racial and cultural politics of the 1960s. The white Southerners who bolted the Democratic Party for the GOP didn’t view the modern state as a necessity; they saw it as apostasy. It wasn’t a pragmatic compromise with the changed landscape of modernity, but a monstrous conspiracy to replace true American values with a spurious and corrupt humanism. In doing so, it sought to blot out God-given distinctions between the races and the sexes — and between the productive and the unproductive — in the name of an artificial equality that would both require and justify constant Federal intrusion.

<snip>

This is the party of Georgia boy Newt Gingrich, who dismissed Kansas Sen. Robert Dole, an old-school Robert Taft Republican, as “a tax collector for the welfare state.” It’s the party of Tennessee’s Martha Blackburn, a House member who hailed the 2013 government shutdown because it would show Americans “they can live with a lot less government than what they thought they needed.” It’s the party of Joe Wilson, the South Carolina congressman who shouted “You lie!” at President Obama during a 2009 speech, and of former Texas governor Rick Perry, who peppers his speeches with references to secession and “states’ rights.” This Republican Party shows little interest in the norms that have defined American politics because it has only contempt for the state those norms are designed to sustain.

Full of scorn for their own government, the ideologues who control today’s GOP feel free to disregard any limitation on their pursuit of conservative purity. The letter to Iran, and the invitation to Netanyahu, merely enact this principle in the realm of foreign affairs. The real concern of the Tea Party isn’t the modern American state, which it despises, but its own hermetic vision of the conservative “cause”– a cause that transcends national boundaries. Its adherents find it easier to cooperate with the leader of Israel’s Likud Party than with their Democratic colleagues in the American Congress. Tom Cotton’s dispatch to Tehran — or something like it — was the inevitable outcome of the process set in motion by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan. We should expect more of the same in the future.

[adaher]

I’m always in favor of trying to think outside the box and try to figure out what’s happening under the surface, but that article strikes me as pretty badly mistaken.

IMO, the motive for the Iran letter is simply that the President bypasses Congress, so they bypass him. Ideology is always trumped by personal relationships and bruised egos. And that’s also why the Democrats aren’t going to back the President. What’s he ever done for them?

[DeptfordX]

You know i’m in my 40’s now and as best I can remember Iran has been 1-2 years away from a bomb for most of my adult life.

Seriously, North Korea has cobbled together some crude Nukes. If Iran was serious about building them, why the hell don’t they already have them?

[Velocity]

Technical question: How is such a letter delivered? Post it online and email Iran, “Read this?”

[YogSothoth]

@CGav8r

Good news, guys. Letter wasn’t actually physically sent to Iran, so it really doesn’t count as a letter.
The worst excuse yet for the Senate Republicans' Iran letter
Seems legit.

Its nice that they are quietly acknowledging that such a letter would be treasonous, but its not a letter so its ok. I take it as a tacit implication of guilt but I suppose it would be too much to hope for that they are all arrested and locked away like they deserve.

[D_Anconia]

@YogSosoth

Its nice that they are quietly acknowledging that such a letter would be treasonous, but its not a letter so its ok. I take it as a tacit implication of guilt but I suppose it would be too much to hope for that they are all arrested and locked away like they deserve.

Was it a violation of the Logan Act for Mrs. Pelosi, in her capacity as Speaker of the House, to meet with Mr. al-Assad, contravening the foreign policy of President Bush?

At least the Republican letter was immediately made public, Lord only knows what Speaker Pelosi said to Mr. al-Assad in private.

[PhillyGuy]

@DeptfordX

Seriously, North Korea has cobbled together some crude Nukes. If Iran was serious about building them, why the hell don’t they already have them?

Nuclear weapons programs, where they exist, are a state’s most closely guarded secret. As a result, there is a lot of misinformation floating around. During the Soviet period, CIA was repeatedly wrong, sometimes underestimating our adversary, sometimes overestimating:

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol49no1/html_files/stalins_bomb_3.html

U.S. Underestimated Soviet Force In Cuba During '62 Missile Crisis (Published...

CIA: US Overestimated Soviet Missiles | News | The Harvard Crimson

Those Iran breakout estimates may be equally mistaken.

This isn’t to say that we should give up on non-proliferation in general, or efforts to stop Iran from getting the bomb in particular. For one thing, if the Western nations gave up on stopping Iran, the Saudis would figure they should get theirs as well (both out of fear of Iran and from a realization that there was little downside).

[YogSothoth]

@D_Anconia

Was it a violation of the Logan Act for Mrs. Pelosi, in her capacity as Speaker of the House, to meet with Mr. al-Assad, contravening the foreign policy of President Bush?

At least the Republican letter was immediately made public, Lord only knows what Speaker Pelosi said to Mr. al-Assad in private.

I don’t care what you think, you’ve not been shown to give a shit about facts or logic. Until you do, its utterly useless to respond to you seriously so here are some smiley faces: :p:o:dubious::D:cool::eek::(:smack:

[Gaudere]

@YogSosoth

I don’t care what you think, you’ve not been shown to give a shit about facts or logic. Until you do, its utterly useless to respond to you seriously so here are some smiley faces: :p:o:dubious::D:cool::eek::(:smack:

[Moderator hat ON]

Take it to the Pit, YogSosoth, not here.

[Moderator hat OFF]

[CGav8r]

“Put simply, the nation must have a single policy regarding which governments are legitimate in the eyes of the United States and which are not,” wrote Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. And if the nation must speak with one voice, “that voice must be the President’s.”

So SCOTUS sez POTUS should be go-to person on decision making in recognizing foreign governments, not Congress.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-strikes-down-born-in-jerusalem-passport-law/2015/06/08/19562bb2-d71d-11e4-ba28-f2a685dc7f89_story.html?tid=sm_fb

[Bricker]

@CGav8r

“Put simply, the nation must have a single policy regarding which governments are legitimate in the eyes of the United States and which are not,” wrote Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. And if the nation must speak with one voice, “that voice must be the President’s.”

So SCOTUS sez POTUS should be go-to person on decision making in recognizing foreign governments, not Congress.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-strikes-down-born-in-jerusalem-passport-law/2015/06/08/19562bb2-d71d-11e4-ba28-f2a685dc7f89_story.html?tid=sm_fb

Is this relevant, in your view, to a criminal violation of the Logan Act by Congress?

[CGav8r]

Earlier discussions in this thread pondered whether Congress and POTUS were coequal in decision making/dealings WRT foreign governments (like the senators did who signed the letter). SCOTUS seems to think that there are decisions made by the Executive Branch that are superior to Congress.

[adaher]

There are areas of foreign policy where the executive branch has supremacy, no doubt. There are also areas where Congress takes the lead. For example, the President can’t just decide to wage wars against whoever, nor can he sign trade pacts that overrule tarriffs or embargoes Congress has imposed.

But choosing which governments to recognize, that’s definitely a Presidential prerogative. But for anything which the President requires money for, that’s up to Congress. Such as waging war, opening embassies, sending ambassadors(which require confirmation), etc.