Mr. Holder, charge Eric Cantor now! Enough is enough!!

[impik]

Seriously, this Is gone too far. Enough with this crap.

[Slit Skirt]

1. i agree they are walking all over our president

[Ozymanithrax]

2. Charge Eric Cantor for what...

Stupid isn't illegal.

What did he do?

[superduperfarleft]

3. Charge him for what?

What a bizarre thread.

[CurtEastPoint]

4. See this recent post for more information...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x521129

[superduperfarleft]

6. Cantor was a moron for saying Pelosi should've been charged.

It's equally moronic to say that Cantor should be charged for this.

[JoePhilly]

13. I'd let it play out anyway ... charge him, and toss his own words back in his face ...

Embarrass the little turd. Make his curl up in a fetal position and make him suffer.

[Slit Skirt]

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

Eric Cantor And The Logan Act.

In 2007, Republicans tried to turn Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria into a major controversy, charging her with granting legitimacy to Bashar al-Assad and violating the Logan Act, which makes it a felony to engage in unauthorized diplomacy with a foreign country. One of the Republicans alleging Pelosi had actually committed a crime was Rep. Eric Cantor:


http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/adam_serwer_archive?month=11&year=2010&base_name=eric_cantor_and_the_logan_act

[hack89]

10. He was wrong then and so is the OP now. nt

[hack89]

7. Why not wait until he commits an actual crime? nt

[shraby]

8. It is an actual crime. The statute says it is.

[hack89]

9. If Jesse Jackson and MCGovern got away with violating the Logan Act

then fair is fair I guess. The Logan Act is over 200 years old and there has never been a prosecution. Never. And Obama will not initiate the first. Can you imagine the list of prominent Democrats and peace activist that could have been prosecuted by Nixon, Reagan and Bush for daring to confront US foreign policy by visiting "bad" countries?

[shraby]

11. There is a difference between visiting "bad" countries and

bad mouthing the president to another country's leader.

[hack89]

12. The Logan Act says nothing about "bad mouthing" the President

it says that independent entities can't engage in negotiations with foreign countries. Cantor did not do that.

[shraby]

14. I'm not arguing with you anymore. Cantor was wrong in what

he did. He DID violate the Logan Act. Nuff said.

[hack89]

17. Many have violated the Logan Act

none have been prosecuted. Cantor will not be the first. Nuff said.

[Slit Skirt]

15. no cantor just said that he would oppose our president in favor

of israel....against our own.

it is more than just this statement The Republicans are walking all over this president and laughing in his face..go ahead and cheer them on
this is just another example of how bold they have become.

[hack89]

16. I realize that

is simply that Cantor is not doing anything new here. And just like everyone before him he will not be prosecuted.

[ProSense]

18. "Cantor is not doing anything new here" Actually

he is

He violated the Logan Act, and he knows exactly what that means because he accused Pelosi of the same thing, committing a felony. Now, he turns around and does the very thing he bogusly accused her of doing.

His comments were a deliberate attempt to undermine the U.S. Government.

[hack89]

19. He is the latest of many accused of violating the Logan Act

there is nothing unique about what he has done.

He is a hypocrite - I get it.

[ProSense]

20. You keep saying that

"He is the latest of many accused of violating the Logan Act

there is nothing unique about what he has done."

There have only been a handful of serious accusations in the last 50 years. There is always a first time.

"He is a hypocrite - I get it."

You think this is about hypocrisy?

Cantor in fact violated the Logan Act. It isn't a bogus accusation like the one he made.

[hack89]

22. Bogus is in the eye of the beholder

Obama is not going to prosecute political opponents - he knows that one day there will be a Republican President and a Democrat congressman who will do and say something stupid. He also has no intention of giving the GOP such a huge political gift.

[ProSense]

25. What?

Are you claiming that the charge against Pelosi was factual?

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.

Pelosi did not have a private meeting in which she threatened to undermine Bush.

Why are you so determined to defend Cantor?

[hack89]

27. I am not defending Cantor

What he did is wrong. I simply believe that he did not commit treason or that he will be prosecuted for violating the Logan Act.

My point about bogus charge was not about Pelosi - it was a general point that the Logan Act has great potential to be used as a political weapon against your opponents. Do you really think a Teabagger president wouldn't use it to prosecute bogus claims against a Democrat. There are good political reason why the Logan Act hasn't been used in 200 year. Obama is not so stupid as to be the first. It would be a political gift Cantor and the GOP would relish. Obama has a lot to do if he is to be reelected. Igniting a political firestorm is not the best way to accomplish that.

[ProSense]

29. What exactly are you saying

What he did is wrong. I simply believe that he did not commit treason or that he will be prosecuted for violating the Logan Act.

The thing he did wrong is violate the Logan Act. It doesn't matter if you believe he will be prosecuted.

My point about bogus charge was not about Pelosi - it was a general point that the Logan Act has great potential to be used as a political weapon against your opponents. Do you really think a Teabagger president wouldn't use it to prosecute bogus claims against a Democrat. There are good political reason why the Logan Act hasn't been used in 200 year. Obama is not so stupid as to be the first. It would be a political gift Cantor and the GOP would relish. Obama has a lot to do if he is to be reelected. Igniting a political firestorm is not the best way to accomplish that.

Again he violated the Act, and that is not a political charge. What does that have to do with anything? The teabaggers want to prosecute the President for not being an American. Do you think justice shouldn't be pursued out of fear that the teabaggers are irrational?

[hack89]

34. So you want Obama to commit political suicide - got it.

meanwhile, back in real world, he has more important things to worry about.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

39. You said....

"one day there will be a Republican President and a Democrat congressman"

DemocraTIC, please!!!!

[karynnj]

23. Give me ONE example of any Democrat meeting with a leader

that a President has been negotiating with saying that he will back the leader against the President?

Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd and John Kerry all met with the Syrian leader - and the media went after Pelosi and to a far more limited degree the other two. Kerry and Dodd actually were senior members of the SFRC and they asked Dr Rice (then SoS) if there were questions she wanted asked - got them, asked them and reported the answers. What they did NOT do was negotiate in any way shape or form.

But, here - bad as this is - he might fall short of "negotiating with a foreign country. (What he is doing is different - he is telling Netanyhu not to do what the President wants.) The closest I can think of is the rumored acts by Kissinger to derail the 1968 peace negotiations and the Reagan actions to have Iran hold the hostages until after the election.

[hack89]

24. How about a Democrat presidential candidate negotiating with a leader

hostile to the US and in direct defiance of US foreign policy?

Jesse Jackson 1984. What right did he have to negotiate a 10 point plan with Fidel Castro? Surely that was a violation of the Logan Act?

[ProSense]

26. For

the release of political prisoners?

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan stated that the activities of the Reverend Jesse Jackson, who had traveled to Cuba and Nicaragua that year and had returned with several Cuban political prisoners seeking asylum in the United States, may have violated the Logan Act; but Jackson was never indicted.<1>

link

Mr. Jackson has previously succeeded in persuading Syria to release a captured American airman and in obtaining the release of several Cuban political prisoners. On both occasions he was initially criticized by President Reagan for becoming involved in foreign policy matters, but later was praised for his efforts.

link

Do you think Cantor deserves praise?

[hack89]

28. No

I have made it clear what I think of Cantor. I simply don't understand the fantasy that he will be prosecuted for it. 200 years of history says otherwise.

[karynnj]

35. I'll agree with you there - Jackson was clearlu in the wrong,

but he was never a mainstream Democrat in the party's leadership. The closest he got was being asked to give one of Bill Clinton's keynote speeches in 1992. He had no right to do so.

The difference I see is Cantor is in the leadership and was essentially telling Netanyahu not to make any concessions to Obama. As it is, it is pretty unlikely that they can negotiate a solution there - but essentially saying they could get a better deal with the Republicans in two years (the true message) can derail this completely.

[rhett o rick]

30. Nixon did and nothing was done. Reagan did and nothing was done. They are immune. nm

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

21. I still think Egon should faces charges for building that containment grid

Damn thing was dangerous, and took out a city block in Brooklyn when Walter Peck shut it down

[Hippo_Tron]

31. Oye vey, this comes up literally every time a congressperson of the other party...

goes to another country and criticizes the President's policy with regard to that country. The Logan Act doesn't say you can't undermine the President, it says that you can't negotiate in an ongoing dispute with another nation. Cantor wasn't negotiating in any ongoing dispute and suggesting that he was is only buying into their narrative that the Obama Administration is hostile towards Israel and that some ongoing dispute between the two nations actually exists.

Additionally, the Logan Act is probably not constitutional but we have yet to test that because nobody has ever been prosecuted under it. Furthermore, the fact of the matter is that the constitution gives congress a role in foreign affairs. Certainly the President and the Executive Branch are the principle negotiators on behalf of the United States but they are not empowered to pass laws or ratify treaties and sometimes agreements between nations require passage of laws or ratification of treaties. In such case it is well within the congressional leadership's right to make it clear to foreign leaders what legislative action they plan to take than might affect them.

Granted, in many instances (including this one) it's a shitty thing to do and the nation would be much better served if the President and congress would serve as a united front rather than congress trying to score political points by undermining the President.

[chill_wind]

32. Holder, lol? Charge somebody with something? Good luck with that.

Probably right after he gets done charging self-confessed war criminals and torture memo authors.

[vaberella]

33. It irks the hell out of me. But I agree. n/t

[polichick]

37. Oh, he'll charge weed smokers - but Republican criminals walk free...

Fuck this lame-ass administration.

[Rowdyboy]

36. Your thread might make more sense if you gave a bit of detail on why you are so irate....

Otherwise it just sounds stupid.

[budkin]

38. He won't be charged, Obama will just say that they need to "work together..."