"Based on Cantor's own standard, he's just committed a felony."

[ProSense]

WHEN THE 'WATER'S EDGE' STANDARD DISAPPEARS....

If our political system made more sense, this would be an astounding scandal that would dominate the discourse.

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday during a meeting in New York that the new GOP majority in the House will "serve as a check" on the Obama administration, a statement unusual for its blunt disagreement with U.S. policy delivered directly to a foreign leader.

"Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington," read a statement from Cantor's office on the one-on-one meeting. "He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other."

This just isn't normal. Laura Rozen called the meeting itself "unusual, if not unheard of." But it's what Cantor said that's astounding.

We're talking about a powerful member of Congress engaged in foreign policy, vowing to a foreign government to oppose the administration's policies regarding that government. Ron Kampeas from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency news agency said he can't remember any U.S. official ever doing this. "(T)o have-a-face to face and say, in general, we will take your side against the White House -- that sounds to me extraordinary," Kampeas said this week.

It is that and more. Cantor not only met in private with a foreign leader to undercut the foreign policy of the elected American president, he proceeded to brag about it.

Also keep in mind, a few years ago, Speaker Nancy Pelosi traveled to Syria and met with Bashar al-Assad. At the time, none other than Eric Cantor personally accused Pelosi of possibly violating the Logan Act, "which makes it a felony for any American 'without authority of the United States' to communicate with a foreign government to influence that government's behavior on any disputes with the United States."

As Adam Serwer noted yesterday, "Based on Cantor's own standard, he's just committed a felony."

<...>

[hobbit709]

1. IOKIYAAR once again.

[Brother Buzz]

18. IOKIYAACCMOAIRPAC

It's OK if you are a card carrying member of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee

[molly77]

37. AIPAC employees are never prosecuted for anything they do.

[Mosaic]

47. It's only okay to fools

And Dems have to stop being tools and fools.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Good thing we have a dynamic Demcratic AG like Holder.

I'm sure he'll have Cantor in the dock for this by the end of the year.

[ProSense]

4. Maybe

it would help if people were outraged. Works for the RW even when they make up stuff.

[Jackpine Radical]

5. So, who's gonna put it in perspective for them?

Fox?

I think the Administration has to take this kind of stuff on for itself & damn well GET the people outraged. The media aren't going to do it for them.

[ProSense]

8. Wait

"I think the Administration has to take this kind of stuff on for itself & damn well GET the people outraged."

You think it's the administration's role to accuse Cantor of treason and get people to accept that?

[vi5]

12. Simple quesion:

Who has more access to and influence over the AG: The average American citizen, or the president and other members of his administration.

[ProSense]

14. The President. Now, answer this

Are you suggesting the President direct the AG to go after Cantor?

Bush did that you know. It didn't go over well.

Do you think that's the role of a President?

What is the role of Americans?

There's plenty of outrage directed at the President. Why do you think Cantor should be spared outrage or that it's not the role of Americans to be outraged?

[vi5]

20. He shouldn't be spared outrage.....

I'm not sure what magical outcome you think our outrage is going to have? Will Cantor listen to the outrage? Will his fellow Republicans?

It sounds like you believe that our elected representatives don't need to act on behalf of what is right and just if the people aren't expressing sufficient outrage in enough ways that they get the message. That you think it's o.k. for them to just shrug their shoulders and go "Hmmm...well there are no people in funny hats holding up pun filled signs to tell us they are outraged about this so maybe we shouldn't act. And Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews and David Gregory aren't really talking about this for hours on end so maybe it's not a big deal if we don't pursue this. Drudge doesn't have a flashing red siren on his site about this, so I guess there's really no outrage."

The bottom line is that right leaning Amercans have in the Republican party, a group of elected officials listening to their outrage and acting on behalf of that outrage. They don't condemn any form that their outrage takes no matter how vile or offenseive Left leaning America does not. Huge numbers of people marching for left leaning causes don't seem to get them to act. Phone calls and letters and e-mails don't seem to get them to act. And when someone on "our side" does get a little brash or bold or uncivil in demanding for some form of justice for what we believe in, our leaders fall all over themselves in a rush to see who can be the first and/or the loudest to condemn that person.

And besides, early on everyone on "our side" was told "We can't be like Republicans. We shouldn't be rude or loud or uncivil. We were told to be quiet and be patient and justice would be served. Well NOW people are going to complain that we weren't outraged enough? Please. Spare me.

[ProSense]

22. Well

"I'm not sure what magical outcome you think our outrage is going to have? Will Cantor listen to the outrage? Will his fellow Republicans? "

...outrage worked with the foreclosure bill.

You cite the RW, but I bet they don't worry about whether their outrage is worth it or not. Also, outrage doesn't have to be "rude or loud or uncivil."

[vi5]

29. They don't need to worry about whether their outrage is worth it..

because they have a political party that listens to their outrage and acts on a good majority of it. We do not. If our party reacted to what it's voters wanted, and called about, and wrote about, and e-mailed about, and that every poll showed was important to them, as quickly as they have when cable news talking heads and right wing radio hosts and instigators got worked up over something then maybe you'd have a point. So yeah, outrage works with Democrats. When their was outrage over the Moveon/Petraus ad, they sure did jump pretty quickly there. When Brietbart/O'Keefe ginned up an Acorn outrage and controversy they acted there as well and hurt a lot of people. And Shirly Sherrod? Pretty quickly there. So I guess our side does listen to outrage, it's just not our outrage.

What outrage worked with the foreclosure bill? Last I checked foreclosures were still happening at a ridiculous and heavily fraudulent rate, and the HAMP program by all accounts was a dismal failure. So please tell me what wonderful, incredibly reactive results outrage got us there? Because clearly I must be missing some wonderful effect of this outrage.

[xxqqqzme]

51. Wait a minute -

He wasn't on 'Meet the Press' or any other Sunday morning waste of time and space program, being grilled w/ hard hitting questions by crack journalists?

[gateley]

13. Although I'm usually with you on letting them know how we feel,

I think Obama and Hillary should be outraged on their own. I'd like Hillary and Joe to yank Cantor into the Oval Office and give him hell. I think Obama should do it, too, but maybe he can't, plus, I'd rather have Obama mad at me than Joe and/or Hillary. :7

[skepticscott]

34. That's exactly what should happen

He deserves to be ripped a new one for undermining US foreign policy and security. And where are the Congressional Democrats calling him out publicly for doing exactly what he castigated Pelosi for doing? Once again, they are nowhere to be seen or heard.

[molly77]

38. ProSense

Do you think this will be on the nightly news? I have a christian friend in the south that gave her tithes to a man working in the republican machine. The bible says Jews are god's chosen people. It makes sense to her.

[AlbertCat]

45. it would help if people were outraged.

What? Outrage over anything Jews do is ... antisemitism!!!!... doncha know.

(like this post will undoubtedly be accused of being)

[NYMdaveNYI]

52. We can ALWAYS count on Atty. Gen. Holder to do the right thing!

"Yeah, we waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.” - George W. Bush

“Waterboarding is torture.” - Eric Holder

----------

Does U.S. Atty. General begin criminal investigation? Nah.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Cantor is a class-A, self-serving P.O.S.

I wonder how much money he gets from the arms industry that is supplying Israel?

Does he think that just because he is Jewish he can get away with this shit? I am Jewish, and I detest him and what he does and everything he represents.

JStreetPAC memo:

What's next for our movement?

While Israel didn't play out as one of voters' top issues in the 2010 elections, the implications of the results on our issue are enormous.

If the past statements and actions of Reps. Eric Cantor, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and others are any indication of how they plan to govern, we are very concerned about the direction this new Congress could take when it comes to securing Israel's future as a Jewish, democratic homeland through a two-state solution.

The mission of J Street is to advocate loudly and clearly for American leadership to achieve a two-state solution that secures Israel's future as a Jewish, democratic home.

Should politicians here at home or abroad threaten that effort with political or partisan attacks, we are ready for the fight.

We hope you and the 160,000 others in our movement will join us in pushing back hard in what will be a tough environment in Congress and press President Obama to continue forging ahead with assertive efforts to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

We'll be in touch with lots more post-election reaction in the coming days,

--Isaac

Isaac Luria
V.P., Communications and New Media
JStreetPAC

[glinda]

6. Is he part of Jews for Jesus?

[BrklynLiberal]

7. No...just old-fasioned "Jewish"

[elleng]

23. NO, Bklyn, I disavow this p.o.s!!!

How DARE he pretend to speak for US, Americans and Jews!

[BrklynLiberal]

25. I am with you.

[asjr]

9. Bibi's problem was made harder by his

"friend" Mr. Cantor. Surely he knows this.

[pnorman]

10. Logan Act

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=520644&mesg_id=520658

[BeyondGeography]

11. Imagine the RW echo chamber with a similar story

He'd be the Hanoi Jane of 2010.

[boppers]

15. Kick.

This is breathtaking in its hubris.

[karynnj]

16. This shows the Republican hypocrisy

In the first place, The Obama administration is not against Israel - no American administration ever has been. The bulk of American Jews agree with the Obama 2 state solution approach - rather than Netanyahu's point of view.

As to the Cantor comment, this is far beyond what Pelosi did - which was to listen. The odd thing is that right wingers have repeatedly posted on various articles where Senator Kerry has been used as an envoy to various countries that he was violating the Logan Act by being involved in negotiations - ignoring that he was very careful to speak of being in close contact with Obama and the State Department.

DeMint last year was even more out of line than Cantor when he met with and promised support for those behind the coup in Honduras - when the US (and the rest of the world) was calling it a coup. What seems clear is that the right wing thinks they are above the law.

The sad thing in this case is that there really is a VERY narrow window before the option of a 2 state solution will disappear. At this point, there are nearly as many Arabs as there are Jews in Israel (defined to include Gaza and the West Bank). At some point, there will be no willingness on the part of Arabs to agree to two states. Time is not on Israel's side.

[ProSense]

19. Exactly,

the missing link is the media. When Pelosi went to Syria, the initial media spin was so thick and biased in favor of Republicans that they failed to mention that not only that Pelosi was part of a delegation that included a Republican, but also that another Republican delegation visited Syria.

Will they lash out at Cantor for his comments?

[jbnow]

28. Did they lash out at Mark Kirk (R-IL) when he bragged about

I Told China Not To Believe U.S. Budget Numbers
Openly telling a foreign leaders not to trust the administration and then bragging about it. Of course he is such a liar maybe he's lying aboiut it.

Well we showed him.
He was in the house when he did that and he was just voted into the senate.

[Fla Dem]

50. The problem is the msm is an echo chamber for FauxNews.

If events aren't reported, analyzed, and demonized on FauxNews, no other major news outlet makes an issue of them. They are sheep following the fox. Main stream media goes where the wind blows, and faux news has been the biggest blowhards for the past 15 years.

[mzteris]

17. treasonous bastard. n/t

[elleng]

24. Yes, mzt, and kind of like mccain recently.

[annabanana]

21. This is a problem for the Country.. . . n/t

[Control-Z]

26. If we kicked this up

and showed the outrage the way we did for KO, something might be done. But will anyone start a petition? How may people would even get it and go sign it?

[otohara]

27. Or Bush Tax Cuts

here, sign this one please, and pass it on.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/189/547/724/

[vi5]

30. So in a clear cut case of right and wrong...

..our leaders should only be expected to act on the side of right if they get enough letters and calls telling them to do so?

Talk about profiles in courage.

And that in a nutshell is where the Democratic party differs from the Republican party. Their outrage is orchestrated and directed and driven from the top down by their leaders with lots of power, money, and megaphones at their control. Or leaders expect it to start from small seeds of minimal power, and money, and no megaphone, and somehow magically work it's way to the top of the ladder of their priorities in an uphill battle.

[Control-Z]

63. I didn't say that.

"So in a clear cut case of right and wrong our leaders should only be expected to act on the side of right if they get enough letters and calls telling them to do so?"

The speedy and overwhelming response to KO's suspension is proof that we the people do have a voice. It would be nice if we exercised that voice. Or we could just piss and moan about what is not being done by the leaders, I guess.

[vi5]

64. It's a poor analogy for several reasons...

1) People have been outraged and excercising their voices over the past however many years and they've been ignored. On any number of major issues. . There have been marches that were huge and been ignored. People write letters and e-mails and call. But unfortunately because cable news doesn't report on that stuff, and because cable news pretty much is the entirety of our elected politicans universe, none of it gets through to them.

2) MSNBC is a business and the outrage over that threatened their business if people decided to boycot over it. It was a pretty direct "If you do this/don't do this you will lose our money and the revenue we provide". The elected reps in Washington don't appear to care about small donors, as their business will only be threated when corporations, wall street, and big money pull their support.

If poll after poll after poll didn't show that the majority of people thought one thing, then you could say that there is some kind of excuse for our Democratic politicians going "Hmmm...maybe the people think this completely opposite thing." But the numbers are there, it's clear this is what the people want, but our leaders are refusing to act decisively on the side of the American people and instead view everything they do through the prism of "trickle down" economics and how it impacts the wealthy, and corporations, and wall street.

Every time over the past 2 years when citizens on our side were getting outraged and wanting to raise their voices, they were told "Shh....stay calm. Don't get out of hand. Don't yell. Just let us handle this. We got this." And so we did, and they failed on any number of levels to accurately guage our level of outrage. And so now people want to say "Well why didn't peopel get outraged?"??!?! Please.

[deacon]

31. Great point. K + R

[BlueJac]

32. We must keep looking forward..........

I heard that from Obama many times. Under the rug it goes!!!

[BlueMTexpat]

33. I don't believe that ANY Republican believes that any standard

EVER applies to THEM.

Standards only apply to Democrats.

Get with the program, please! :sarcasm:

[Vinca]

35. Of course it's a stretch to imagine anyone in this administration

would be inclined to utter the words "Logan Act." Instead, they'll hold hands with Eric and sing kumbayah. We're sorry, Eric, if we got in the way of your foreign policy.

[polichick]

43. That's probably not far from the truth - sad as it is. nt

[tomp]

36. maybe you should send a letter to obama. nt

[CanonRay]

39. Clear Logan Act violation. DOJ, where are you?

[sulphurdunn]

41. The AG will do nothing

unless Obama is also willing to take on AIPAC, and Rep. Cantor will be anointed King of Israel before that happens.

[SidDithers]

40. K&R...nt

Sid

[polichick]

42. He'll be charged very soon - right after the war criminals are brought to justice. nt

[NYMdaveNYI]

54. That’s day after our....

socialist marxist communist muslim jihadist space-alien antichrist bible-snatchin’ gun-stealin’ darkie of a president admits he’s from Kenya.

[polichick]

61. Actually, it could happen as soon as our president decides to put the rule of law over politics. nt

[spicegal]

44. And so it begins.....

This is about the 2012 election. The obvious implication is that the Obama administration and the Dems don't care about Israel's safety. So, now, not only will the GOP sabotage Obama's domestic agenda, they're hitting him on foreign policy. This is an all out War against our president. Isn't what Cantor doing a bit treasonous?

[Democat]

46. I'm sure Obama will be willing to compromise!

No problem.

[Dr Morbius]

48. Is there time for a Congressional Censure of Representative Cantor in the lame duck session?

Undermining the role of the Presidency in foreign policy? Not what a member of Congress should be allowed to do, regardless of party.

GOP hypocrisy, again.

[laughingliberal]

49. Probably will be moving forward on this. nt

[earcandle]

53. Bring the hammer down and prosecute then.

[laughingliberal]

55. K & R nt

[jenmito]

56. I haven't heard ONE WORD about this today in the "liberal" media. n/t

[jenmito]

57. Could you imagine how much coverage of this there would be if there were a liberal version of Faux?

That would be the first step in getting the PEOPLE outraged, forcing something to be done about this.

[rasputin1952]

58. Cantor committed a serious crime, he has absolutely no power

under the Constitution to promise any Head of State anything. This does not rise to the crime of treason, as Israel is not our enemy, however, why this bombastic idiot would attempt to usurp power from the Executive Branch is beyond all reason. He could be tried in Federal Court under the Logan Act:

The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 <1948>) is a single federal statute making it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.


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.


While the Logan act was actually used only once, (in 1803, it involved a Kentucky newspaper article that argued for the formation in the western United States of a separate nation allied to France. No prosecution followed). (Jesse Jackson was under threat for convening with Castro, the Reagan administration did not pursue charges.)

The point is, I can't think of a better reason than Cantor, to bring this up again, although I highly doubt anything would come of it. But where is the outrage...we won't see much from the media, they are little more than RW spin machines these days.

All this really does is show Cantor for what he really is, a hypocritical piece of crap. The good people could rise up and have a recall election, doubt that would happen either. But the good people of VA must send this cretin packing. 4 years of this clown, he's up for re-election in 2014...sad, truly sad.

[madrchsod]

59. a very dangerous statement by cantor.....

the most dangerous terrorist group/groups are the ayran nations. i`m sure their are fbi and secret service agents in our government saying what the fuck today....

[ccharles000]

60. k/r

[polichick]

62. Both Cheney and Bush have admitted to war crimes, and yet...

[ProSense]

65. Cantor is a punk, now tries to clarify his statement

Cantor Spox Clarifies 'Check' Comments GOPer Made To Netanyahu

Rep. Eric Cantor's office is clarifying a statement it put out last week about the meeting between Cantor, the likely next House Majority Leader, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Cantor spokesperson Brad Dayspring told The Washington Post that Cantor's comment to Netanyahu that the new Republican majority in the house 'will serve as a check on the Administration' was 'not in relation to U.S./Israel relations.'