Climate change actions and how to best handle pandemics just to cite a couple. Please don't ask me for further help. You can do your own homework if you want.
Who cares, but maybe dems. Just like who cares what Repubs support but repubs. Both support party corruption. It's why I don't belong to any party. IMO, no one should support either party. Each are for themselves and not for the country.
Incorrect... read your embossed version of Volume 2 of the Mueller report to see who thought it was very possible he violated the Act (Page 32).. I'm BEGGING Joe and Kamala to get on the line with Iran to BEG to get back in the deal.... I'd be on my knees, but I have very little cushioning down there anymore... BTW, I don't hear that Pompeo is making much progress on getting his Snapback... Nancy was hosting this years G7 meeting. Last year, she was just a regular participant in France, where the topic was "Committed for the Oceans".. Is Nancy violating the Logan Act every time she participates in meetings with her international counterparts?
A member of a transition team makes a phone call and Joe Biden wants to hit him with the Logan Act.. A member of Congress ( hint not part of the executive) signs a deal with foreign countries and you all ..Troll.. Its clear as day and of course nothing will be done about it.
No, he does not want to waste his time and resources. Nobody has ever been successfully prosecuted for violation of the Logan Act. That doesn't mean it was never violated. It has been violated prima facie many times before (including by Pelosi in Syria. the Democrats with the Sandinistas, and Ted Kennedy during the 1984 campaign to cite a couple) but successful prosecution is difficult and time and resource consuming. Barr has much more important fish to fry, like the coup attempt pursued by the DOJ and intelligence agencies.
I agree that Teleconferencing would be part of intercourse, but I really wouldn't have started that with "Per the Logan Act", which was written in 1799.... Of course, that's about the only part of the Logan Act Nancy even touched...
INFORMATION FLASH: "possibly violating" is light years away from indicting and prosecuting for, which Mueller did not do. "Possibly violating" was nothing more than breadcrumbs for the barbarians at the gate.
You - "nobody thought he violated the act" Me - Proving you otherwise The fact nobody took it any further for Flynn should convince you it's a meaningless law in 2020... Took me a while to get there myself, but I'm fine with it now.. 1-800-IRN-DEAL..... Call Now!
Ok. So all members of Congress, R and D, who travel abroad to meet with anyone from a foreign governmental entity, should be charged? That would put a lot of Congress in prison. If you’re so convinced of your position I suggest you report Pelosi to trump’s DOJ. I am absolutely certain they will give your report all the attention it deserves.
Both are snippets out of context. Here is the text: § 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. Pelosi did nothing of the sort. She was neither influencing the actions or policies of any foreign government, nor was she asking for any favors. It was just an agreement to try to place climate change issues on the front burner.
I merely pointed out that Pelosi committed a felony. I agree it is highly probably a moot point. If Trump had done something similar Pelosi would impeach him. Could be. Often it is viewed like many discretionary prosecutions -- no harm no foul -- like police who do not write tickets for a slow moving stop. Doesn't mean the law to stop at a signal should be eliminated. Like Reagan's response to the clamoring to prosecute Jesse Jackson for his negotiations to get prisoners released. He said no prosecution because there was no harm. It can still be useful politically as in Obama and Biden thinking prosecuting Flynn under the Logan Act would be politically beneficial, but that is another story (and not a good reason for the (or any) law.) I think it is basically a worthwhile law because there are situations when a citizen working with a foreign power can cause serious problems, but needs to be more constrained, detailed and specific. Congress has toyed with eliminating or changing it from time to time but it never got very far. An interesting side note: the law is named after a citizen who negotiated with France in the 1790s. A few years later Mr. Logan was elected a senator.
Virtually all congressional trips to meet with foreign governments are done with executive branch blessing, and they seldom "communicate" their own policies. It is extremely unlikely that the DOJ will make any attempt whatsoever to prosecute Pelosi. It would determine no harm no foul and exercise prosecutorial discretion, has much greater fish to fry, and not worth any time or resources. This does not mean that Pelosi didn't commit a felony, however.
