PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: President in Exile YOLT on January 25, 2018, 08:25:26 AM
-
'Former Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly tried to meddle in Middle East peace talks, allegedly telling a close associate of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas not to “yield to President Trump’s demands.”'
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/25/john-kerry-reportedly-coaches-palestinians-not-to-yield-to-trump-in-peace-talks-spurring-backlash.html
-
He's a dem, and a buddy of BHO, so no, nothing to see here.
-
Kerry, Obama, Hillary, etc are all traitors run by George Soros. They've purposely worked against American interests their entire careers.
-
I don't know the legal term, but the Logan act is probably unenforceable on several counts. It's never been invoked in a legal case, and it's in contravention of the 1st amendment(most likely why no prosecutor has ever tried using it). Not that I'm supporting what Kerry did, or said. I find it rather disingenuous to go as a citizen, who is falsely representing himself with the imprimatur of the govt to undermine the established authority, but the other path of free speech restriction by citizens is far, far more dangerous to the US.
-
Liberals are not really into inconvenient laws, except when they can abuse them to silence disagreement.
-
If I were in the admin, and found out that the controlling Palestinian authorities took a meeting with Kerry, I would almost certainly impress much more draconian methods in dealing with them. What islamics understand is harsh, and exacting methods. they cut off a hand for theft, stone people for adultery, etc. It's what they understand, so deal with them harshly, and maybe gain some respect.
-
I didn't see WHEN Lurch made these statements, but I assume it was after Trump took office.
Question: Didn't Trump get chastized by the MSM for talking to the Ruskies or someone before he was elected? Where is the non-Fox MSM on this one?
-
Shirley the Trump staff was castigated with the Logan act violations, but not sure if Trump personally was tarred with that particular brush. Probably so. It's like the typical lawyer stuff - put everything including the kitchen sink into the hopper and see what survives. So far - they have one count of lying to the feds, and some various mistakes on reporting as agents of a foreign power. Meh, if a guy doesn't need know to SHUT UP when the feds ask questions, he deserves to go to prison, just like Martha.
-
I didn't see WHEN Lurch made these statements, but I assume it was after Trump took office.
Question: Didn't Trump get chastized by the MSM for talking to the Ruskies or someone before he was elected? Where is the non-Fox MSM on this one?
This just happened.
-
I don't know the legal term, but the Logan act is probably unenforceable on several counts. It's never been invoked in a legal case, and it's in contravention of the 1st amendment(most likely why no prosecutor has ever tried using it). Not that I'm supporting what Kerry did, or said. I find it rather disingenuous to go as a citizen, who is falsely representing himself with the imprimatur of the govt to undermine the established authority, but the other path of free speech restriction by citizens is far, far more dangerous to the US.
This seems to be precisely what the Logan Act was designed to prevent. Can you imagine if Kerry, Hillary, Albright, and other former SecStates went around the globe conducting foreign policy? It would bring chaos to US foreign policy and clearly undermine this country.
I think the First Amendment argument fails on a number of levels. First, Kerry would have the first amendment right to give speeches or write letters expressing his opinion. But advising heads of state on policy matters and posing as a government official, implied or implicit, seems to violate the spirit of the law.
Why the fuck have a law like that if no one will enforce it?
-
Why the fuck have a law like that if no one will enforce it?
Because it could prove useful if a Republican violates it.
-
Because it could prove useful if a Republican violates it.
The swamp strikes.
-
Agree, that is what the Logan is trying to prevent. Someone claiming a kind of authority to negotiate foreign policy which they do not have. It could be a problem, and Kerry seems 'guilty' of doing that.
However(a couple of them), first thing is, there is a hierarchy to administration of justice. We have 1-policies, 2-rules, 3-regulations, 3-laws, 4-constitution. Note that all are inferior to the one above them. Telling a citizen(which Kerry is a member of) that he cannot speak freely to anyone he wants as a private citizen trumps the Logan act(somewhere between a policy and a regulation). Next, the Logan Act has been rendered useless because a law which has been on the books for decades but has never been enjoined as a legal prosecution. I can't recall the legal term, but if a law/act is not actively used, it falls out of use due to obsolescence.
Believe it or not, I will defend Kerry's authority to speak, even to foreign dictators/presidents even though I strongly disagree with his statements and disagree with his political platform. We just can't have the govt out there suppressing speech, even speech that does harm, or is in contravention of the current political agenda.
sorry....
-
Kerry is guilty of Sedition. He may be laying the groundwork for a run in 2020. The Dems just love anti American rhetoric.
se·di·tion
[səˈdiSH(ə)n]
NOUN
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.
synonyms: rabble-rousing · incitement to rebel · subversion · troublemaking · provocation · rebellion · insurrection · mutiny · insurgence · civil disorder
-
Agree, that is what the Logan is trying to prevent. Someone claiming a kind of authority to negotiate foreign policy which they do not have. It could be a problem, and Kerry seems 'guilty' of doing that.
However(a couple of them), first thing is, there is a hierarchy to administration of justice. We have 1-policies, 2-rules, 3-regulations, 3-laws, 4-constitution. Note that all are inferior to the one above them. Telling a citizen(which Kerry is a member of) that he cannot speak freely to anyone he wants as a private citizen trumps the Logan act(somewhere between a policy and a regulation). Next, the Logan Act has been rendered useless because a law which has been on the books for decades but has never been enjoined as a legal prosecution. I can't recall the legal term, but if a law/act is not actively used, it falls out of use due to obsolescence.
Believe it or not, I will defend Kerry's authority to speak, even to foreign dictators/presidents even though I strongly disagree with his statements and disagree with his political platform. We just can't have the govt out there suppressing speech, even speech that does harm, or is in contravention of the current political agenda.
sorry....
I don't remember you so vigorously defending Trump's right to speak to the Russians as a private citizen.
-
I don't remember you so vigorously defending Trump's right to speak to the Russians as a private citizen.
I don't remember it either, but the terms are exactly the same. Trump as candidate, and all his campaign staff, and anyone not in govt service have the (almost) absolute right to speak to foreigners, including those in positions of power. In the case of limitations on the 1st amendment, the bar for most cases is that it produce some clear and present danger. As an example, if a senior Trump or Kerry aid, after the principal was elected and not inaugurated were to tell one of the Russian foreign ministers that the US would be bombing Moscow the day after inauguration, and that minister took him serious, and that resulted in some immediate intl flap, and that flap wound up hurting the US, then after all that - it could quite possibly be a limitation on the 1st amendment. As for the Logan act - it is the proverbial toothless tiger. And that goes for both parties, and all people of the US.
And once again, while I'm a proponent of most of Trump's agenda, I'm also not a rubber stamp for everything he does, and also not a hater of all things liberal.
-
Agree, that is what the Logan is trying to prevent. Someone claiming a kind of authority to negotiate foreign policy which they do not have. It could be a problem, and Kerry seems 'guilty' of doing that.
However(a couple of them), first thing is, there is a hierarchy to administration of justice. We have 1-policies, 2-rules, 3-regulations, 3-laws, 4-constitution. Note that all are inferior to the one above them. Telling a citizen(which Kerry is a member of) that he cannot speak freely to anyone he wants as a private citizen trumps the Logan act(somewhere between a policy and a regulation). Next, the Logan Act has been rendered useless because a law which has been on the books for decades but has never been enjoined as a legal prosecution. I can't recall the legal term, but if a law/act is not actively used, it falls out of use due to obsolescence.
Believe it or not, I will defend Kerry's authority to speak, even to foreign dictators/presidents even though I strongly disagree with his statements and disagree with his political platform. We just can't have the govt out there suppressing speech, even speech that does harm, or is in contravention of the current political agenda.
sorry....
Why is it against US law to impersonate a Military Officer? A quick google search found Jonathan Wade Short guilty of this in the Western District is Kentucky US District Court. Doesn’t he have the first amendment right to dress like a soldier and tell people he was on multiple deployments?
Same with impersonating a police officer, though I think that’s a state law matter.
-
Gosh, I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Would guess it's one of those exceptions to the 1st amendment. Except for the second, the amendments aren't absolute rights. Look at what's been done to the 4th in the past 20 years. It's basically gone, and we have general warrant searches happening all the time. Why does that happen? Because people let it happen. Why is against the law to suit up like a soldier? I don't know, but it just kinda makes sense that we wouldn't want civies running around as members of the armed forces.
-
Gosh, I don't know, I'm not a lawyer. Would guess it's one of those exceptions to the 1st amendment. Except for the second, the amendments aren't absolute rights. Look at what's been done to the 4th in the past 20 years. It's basically gone, and we have general warrant searches happening all the time. Why does that happen? Because people let it happen. Why is against the law to suit up like a soldier? I don't know, but it just kinda makes sense that we wouldn't want civies running around as members of the armed forces.
Or suits running around as government officials.
-
Or suits running around as government officials.
If you have some evidence that Kerry identified himself as an authority of the US govt, by all means - provide it. I'm sure the current admin would be interested.
-
If you have some evidence that Kerry identified himself as an authority of the US govt, by all means - provide it. I'm sure the current admin would be interested.
Oh for God’s sake. Would an American not connected to the government, either directly or implied, get into a meeting with key foreign government officials to talk foreign policy.
-
All the time. US CEOs talk to world leaders constantly. The sticky wicket is if Kerry has represented himself as other than a private citizen, and a member of the authorized US or state govt. I know that Trump is a past master at chatting with foreign leaders about policy, the American Way, labor rules, state owned/run business etc. Kerry is surely telling them what they want to hear, and they can even think he's a US dignitary. But - if he doesn't represent himself as having standing to negotiate, it's all just bloviation. Hopefully the idiots he's talking to will fall for it, and act accordingly. We could do with just a bit more strife in the ME to further cement our restrictive goals on immigration, and terrorism control. Heck - to be charitable, Kerry may have done us(conservatives) a favor by blabbing, and stirring the pot. 8)
-
All the time. US CEOs talk to world leaders constantly. The sticky wicket is if Kerry has represented himself as other than a private citizen, and a member of the authorized US or state govt. I know that Trump is a past master at chatting with foreign leaders about policy, the American Way, labor rules, state owned/run business etc. Kerry is surely telling them what they want to hear, and they can even think he's a US dignitary. But - if he doesn't represent himself as having standing to negotiate, it's all just bloviation. Hopefully the idiots he's talking to will fall for it, and act accordingly. We could do with just a bit more strife in the ME to further cement our restrictive goals on immigration, and terrorism control. Heck - to be charitable, Kerry may have done us(conservatives) a favor by blabbing, and stirring the pot. 8)
God I hate the double standards.