Half of the US Senate Just Committed Felonies, Could Face 3 Years in PrisonNick Bernabe How did Senate Republicans violate the Logan Act? Well they did that by being war mongers. But more specifically, when 47 members of Congress signed onto a letter that was sent to Iranian officials in an attempt to undermine the peace deal with Iran, they clearly violated the act and also all committed felonies. According to Cornell University, the act reads: 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. And the precedent has already been clearly set. In the case United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp. (1936), Justice Sutherland wrote in the majority opinion: The President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it. The Republicans, who so often talk of the Constitution almost as highly as they talk of their support for Israel, seem to have trampled over the document multiple times in as many weeks. You see, when they invited Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu to speak to Congress, they were also in violation of the Logan Act then too. John Boehner is mostly at fault for the Netanyahu fiasco, though, so hes the only member of the House that should prosecuted for that. However, 47 members of the US Senate all Republicans have clearly violated the Logan Act, and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Three years in prison for 47 members of our war mongering Congress? I would support that. The real question is: will enough Americans stand up and carry out the laws that are written plain as day in the Constitution, or will we simply sit back and expect the government to punish itself? President Obama, who himself has shown little to no respect for the Constitution, seems to have no interest in prosecuting the war mongering 47, so thats up to us to carry out. A petition to charge the Senators has already racked up over 40,000 signatures overnight (UPDATE: the petition has now surpassed 100,000 signatures, which means the White House will have to respond to it). However, Citizens arrest seems to be a more effective plan of action than petitioning. These 47 men committed felonies and should be charged just as any one of us regular folks would be when we commit a crime. Who should we arrest first? John McCain or Lindsey Graham? Nick Bernabe writes for TheAntiMedia.org, where this first appeared. Tune-in to The Anti-Media radio show Monday-Friday @ 11pm EST, 8pm PST. Help us fix our typos: editor@theantimedia.org Israel did 911. Israel is Americas worst enemy. Looks like they want us to fight another war for them, but this time it will be WWIII Israel? more like Saudi Arabia. Funded the whole thing. Why Bush rushed all the top Saudis out of the US when no flights were to be allowed. What we gunna do? go to war with the country that provides us with the majority of our oil? nope. We certainly DO NOT any longer NEED oil from anywhere else, I say cut the saudis off. It would be even better if we quit sending our money all over the world. Cut the horsecrap! The Logan Act has NEVER resulted in a prosecution nor has it ever been tested to see if it even Constitutional. It did result in an indictment only once (in 1803) but the charges were dropped. Its completely Constitutional. Look it up. What you are arguing is that the Logan Act has been effective.until now. Your logic appears to be that since the Act has been effective, its use is horsecrap. Laws that prevent crimes can therefore be dismissed. That is a bizarre theory, to say the least. Only laws that work are invalid. The Logan Act is very clear: would you oppose testing it in this case, or do you stand by your bizarre logi that it is horsecrap? The author assumes that we are still under the constitution and a nation of laws. No senators are going to get fined or go to prison over this. Government officials who commit treason are also by law eligible for the death penalty. I have not seen any of them hung. Let me know when it happens. Hanged is the correct term for the noose. Pictures (and some men) are hung. Nice hear from a literate person for a change! WE are still under the US Constitution, it is our LEGITIMATE government. Do not confuse a few decades of domestic enemies, and/or traitors of the USA serving within our government as the destruction of it. What you (generic you) must do is really familiarize yourself with the US Constitution, and the Constitution of the state you are in (you will probably have to get a printed one as many online have been changed unlawfully to reflect what the traitors want the people to believe just like Obama has been rewriting the US Constitution to fix some problems within it, nor is he the only one). When you understand that the PEOPLE themselves are the ones that hold accountable those who are corrupt and traitorous serving then you will also see what the remedies are, starting with (real) Grand Juries, Militias of the several states, etc. Example, the Preamble to the US Constitution summarizes the US Constitution, while the Preamble to the Bill of Rights makes clear the limitations placed on those who serve within our governments, and that the people have more natural Rights that are above the authority granted to the state and federal governments: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. The Preamble to the US Constitution says who is responsible for doing certain things within our nation. Those things are to be done to form a more perfect Union. We the People of the United States are to: The US Constitution forbids those who serve within our government to create governmental professional law enforcement and to keep a standing military. They are REQUIRED to use the militia because it would never let a police state form here in America. That wars are forbidden EXCEPT for defense of our nation. That is the ONLY reason under the US Constitution America goes to war. Only the congress can declare war. US presidents are ONLY the Commander in Chief under specific circumstances. Article 2, Section 2: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, WHEN CALLED INTO THE ACTUAL SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES; (caps are mine for emphasis) James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution: The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war. George Washington: The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure. James Madison: In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout James Madison: Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the James Madison: The means of defense against foreign danger James Madison warned: No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. It also helps to understand what *Terrorism is under our laws. * 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as the unlawful use of George Washington: It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Thomas Jefferson: I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. John Quincy Adams: America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom. Thomas Paine: Not a place upon earth might be so happy as America. Her situation is remote from all the wrangling world, and Thomas Jefferson: Peace, commerce and honest friendship with Alexander Hamilton: Foreign influence is truly the Grecian horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its influence. We can go after anyone who serves within our governments by using a (real) Grand Jury. For a better understanding of Grand Juries read Justice Antonin Scalias brief when writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992) below: The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present True Bills of indictment to a court, which is then The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arms The grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendments constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge Given the grand jurys operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jurys evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution to permit an indictment to be challenged on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury. End Quote) (Plus it would be another unlawful act against the people which is **treason as it is a constitutional tool of the People.) ** http://www.shastadefense.com/Dare-Call-It-Treason-21.pdf Hope that assists in clearing things up. You and Carleton are biting off two ends of the same snake. The Constitution and Bill of Rights are indeed the next best thing to a just King, and they still at this moment, at least theoretically, run the country. However, it is also true that the meaning of the very words written on these papers have been so interpreted, reinterpreted, sub-sectioned, and asterixed (Patriot Act, Homeland Security, Executive Privilege, etc.), that it has become, for all practical purposes, too ambiguous and subordinated to be useful. Or even a protection against a sovereign gone wild. it has become, for all practical purposes, too ambiguous and subordinated to be useful. But that is the point. WHO is supposed to enforce the US Constitution? Who is supposed to remove those who are corrupt, domestic enemies, or even traitorous in their actions that serve within our governments? Who is required, constitutionally to do these things: Enforce the US Constitution and each states Constitution, It is not those that serve within any of the three branches within our governments. What tools did/do we have to stop this revolution to destroy our nation from within by those serving within our governments instead of doing their duty to their country? Elections but we let them install Election Fraud which, since it is a crime against the people, stopping their voice IS treason against America and the American people. The Militia but in the 60s we let them do away with them, though that really started before then. That was constitutionally required just so we could NEVER be a police state. Education, so that the people would (because they learned real history) recognize the many faces of despotism. But we let them take over educating and dumbing down our children Thomas Jefferson: The most effectual means of preventing [the perversion of power into tyranny are] to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt The Grand Jury: The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the government and the people. Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present True Bills of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a buffer the The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such supervisory judicial authority exists. The common law of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury. Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the The grand jury can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not. It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even the precise nature of the offense it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy. Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendments constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge Given the grand jurys operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jurys evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution to permit an indictment to be challenged on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury. Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992) The firm admonition that there will be NO STANDING military. They will not be funded beyond 2 years. The US Constitution, each states Constitution themselves: They are the contracts, the strongest contracts made because they require an Oath that the person who is taking the position knows those laws and duties, will keep them and it is a crime in and of itself to not keep the Oath. Contract law is very established here (and worldwide). The tools are ours, and still there, and there are even more of them, but WE do little. See why it took them decades to get to the position where they now believe they can finish off the US Constitution and the USA? WHO is supposed to enforce the US Constitution?It is not those that serve within any of the three branches within our governments. It is indeed the job of the three branches of government to enforce the Constitution, however enforce is a bad word to choose. Their job is to see that the Constitution is obeyed, not so much enforced. As much as a check on citizens it is also a check on the government itself, and the three branches demonstrate this as a check on each other. What tools did/do we have to stop this revolution to destroy our nation from within by those serving within our governments instead of doing their duty to their country? If you get a blind fool driving a good car you make a mistake thinking the accident or car trouble is due to the car. Its not the system thats bad, its the people in it, and, at least theoretically, we are the ones who put them in the drivers seat. As for the rest, you know it comes down to interpretation of the 5th Amendment. We are in agreement that some people living well today, in positions of power, need to stand on charges of treason, and perhaps the Grand Jury as explicated by Jefferson is the way to do this. The fact remains that a good portion of the public (read: US) esteem authority over truth, and too many more dont know the difference. Plato warned against the limitations of democracy, we know, about mob rule. But when only half of the people vote, and we no longer use hand-counting of ballots, and when we continue to be dictated to by the tyranny of the money-loving Demopublican Party and not demand alternatives, well, I think kind of you reap what you sow. Give them a hand you know they will take the whole arm. Etc. Plato warned against the limitations of democracy, Not sure if I am misunderstanding you with this, but we are NOT a democracy, nor have we ever been one. We are a Constitutional Republic in which mob rule does not work (when it is working lawfully). It is indeed the job of the three branches of government to enforce the Constitution No, they are to defend the authority granted to them from the other branches and anyone and everyone else. Even the courts duty is to make sure that the duties assigned to the branches is being done by the branch it was assigned to, that what they are doing is in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution, that no branch ever attacks the protected Rights of the people, those listed and not listed. Judge Wythe (John Marshalls law teacher) in his opinion in Caton where he indicated that it is a judges responsibility to check overreaching by the political branches by these words: If the whole legislature, an event to be deprecated, should attempt to overleap the bounds, prescribed to them by the people, I, in administering the public justice of the country, will meet the united powers, at my seat in this tribunal; and, pointing to the constitution, will say, to them, here is the limit of your authority; and, hither, shall you go, but no further. The Preamble to the US Constitution says, We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. That makes it OUR duty be it by using those we put into office to carry out the will of the PEOPLE (not the will of the banks or corporations, etc). But that made America a huge danger to the rest of the nations of this world because only here did the common masses choose for themselves, have individual rights, were not obliged to the nobility or rulers of the nation even for their own lives. America has been under attack since her conception because of that. Our founders did a Grand experiment when they created the Constitution of the United States of America. They reversed everything that was known till then in governments and put the people in charge, and it IS misinformation and dumbed down education that makes them think they are not. From their own writings to summarize our nations beginnings: Benjamin Franklin: Freedom is not a gift bestowed upon us by other men, but a right that belongs to us by the laws of God and nature. Patrick Henry: It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here. Thomas Jefferson: The most effectual means of preventing [the perversion of power into tyranny are] to illuminate, as far as practicable, the minds of the people at large, and more especially to give them knowledge of those facts which history exhibits, that possessed thereby of the experience of other ages and countries, they may be enabled to know ambition under all its shapes, and prompt to exert their natural powers to defeat its purposes. Thomas Jefferson:I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, And if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power. George Washington: The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people. James Madison, Federalist 46: The Foederal and State Governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, instituted with different powers, and designated for different purposes They must be told that the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone; and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expence of the other. Truth no less than decency requires, that the event in every case, should be supposed to depend on the sentiments and sanction of their common constituents. Thomas Jefferson: The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite. Thomas Jefferson to Wilson Nicholas: Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction. James Madison: Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government. Thomas Jefferson: Laws are made for men of ordinary understanding and should, therefore, be construed by the ordinary rules of common sense. Their meaning is not to be sought for in metaphysical subtleties which may make anything mean everything or nothing at pleasure. Thomas Paine: He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent which will reach to himself. John Adams: You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe Thomas Jefferson: I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition. Thomas Paine: Government ought to be as much open to improvement as anything which appertains to man, instead of which it has been monopolized from age to age, by the most ignorant and vicious of the human race. Need we any other proof of their wretched management, than the excess of debts and taxes with which every nation groans, and the quarrels into which they have precipitated the world? Alexander Hamilton: We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy. Thomas Jefferson: I believe the states can best govern our home concerns and the federal government our foreign ones. Thomas Jefferson: The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits. Thomas Jefferson: A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. Thomas Jefferson: To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Paine: Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 69: The one (a president) can confer no privileges whatever; the other [the king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies. Alexander Hamilton: Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one querter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? George Washington: It is our true policy to steer clear of entangling alliances with any portion of the foreign world. The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. Thomas Jefferson: I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. John Quincy Adams: America does not go abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She well knows that by enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standards of freedom. Alexander Hamilton: Foreign influence is truly the Grecian horse to a republic. We cannot be too careful to exclude its influence. James Madison: The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition. James Madison: Because if . . . [An Unalienable Natural Right of Free Men] . . . be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: It is limited with regard to the coordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires, not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained: but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the greater Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The people who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are Slaves Alexander Hamilton: Every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid. James Madison: The ultimate authority resides in the people, and that if the federal government got too powerful and overstepped its authority, then the people would develop plans of resistance and resort to arms. James Madison, Federalist 57, wrote that Congress can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends, as well as on the great mass of the society. James Madison, Federalist 39: Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution. (It was established.) Thomas Jefferson: When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself public property. Benjamin Franklin: It would be thought a hard government that should tax its people one tenth part. John Jay, first Chief Justice of the United States: No power on earth has a right to take our property from us without our consent. I believe we pretty much agree on everything else. It IS our responsibility to make sure that there is NO Election Fraud those that serve within our government only was assigned the duty to set the days of elections, etc. The rest was up to us. It is also our duty to remove the corrupt from office, which ever position they serve within, whichever branch, and be it state or federal. It is also OUR duty to see that we ourselves are really educated and not dumbed down take responsibility for our lives. Thomas Jefferson: Our legislators are not sufficiently apprized of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us. Thomas Jefferson: The government created by this compact (the Constitution) was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party (the people of each state) has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress. J. Reuben Clark: God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run not to individuals, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan our allegiance and the only allegiance we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, runs to our inspired Constitution which God himself set up. So runs the oath of office of those who participate in government. A certain loyalty we do owe to the office which a man holds, but even here we owe just by reason of our citizenship, no loyalty to the man himself. In other countries it is to the individual that allegiance runs. This principle of allegiance to the Constitution is basic to our freedom. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this land of liberty from other countries. Thomas Jefferson: It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights; that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism; free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy, and not confidence, which prescribes limited constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power; that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no farther, our confidence may go. In questions of power, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. Personally, dump the parties as they are factions used for division of the people. Guess activist post did not like my reply . .must have quoted the US Constitution or the laws too much. Basically we ARE still under the US Constitution traitors and domestic enemies be (down to the devil). The constitution was overthrown in 1861. The junta federal government incorporated as a for profit corporation in 1871. Court system in the U.S. is Admiralty Law which has nothing to do with the constitution, It is the law of the sea. The Constitution exist, but we are not ruled under it. 1000% CORRECT! Senators have immunity under the Speech and Debate clause, so this is mere Barry-provoked chest-thumping. That has nothing to do with the Logan Act. It is exactly what the Logan Act intends to ban: correspondence with a foreign government with the intent of influencing conduct. You need to read the Logan Act before making a fool of yourself If the goal was not to influence Iran, why did they send it? Speech and debate is not the subject of the Logan Act. It bans any citizen who 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.. This was correspondence to Iran with the clear goal of undermining trust in US diplomacy, since the threat is made that the agreement will be repealed when Republicans take office. The goal is to influence Iran not to make a deal since Republicans will undo it. This is a clear case of seeking to influence the conduct of a foreign government. ONly a weasel would deny the clear purpose. Pardon me but I wont be holding my breath waiting for that to happen even if the white house goes after them, they will go after the president for any of a fucking SLEW of unconstitutional/illegal shit hes pulled. If they had a case, they would pursue it. They have no case, but the 47 have clearly violated the Logan Act. Vague, unsupported claims do not negate clear cases of violation of the law. Nice try, tho. Stfu, this justice system wont even fire a federal employee for not showing a valid birth certificate. The system is FKN GARBAGE! Iran has invaded NOBODY since Persian times. Seems like the real threat is just a little Westand of course, in Congress. HOw dare you introduce historical facts! Congress has the support of millions of Americans..15% approve of the Republican controlled Congress! Again dont hold your breath the US Political system rarely pays for their crimes . . . Nope WE PAY. WE THE PEOPLE Should know what our leader ( NOT REALLY) IS TELLING ANOTHER COUNTRY !!! I have no problem with what they did !!! What I have a problem with is.WHY IS HE STILL IN OFFICE !??!?!?! The law, though it may merit some praise, served rather to display than to alleviate the public distress. Your nation is dissolving and wolves have set up camp all around you. Yet people continue to do the same thing, day in day out. It hasnt become unbearable yet, so the people endure, but they are going down with a sinking ship. Just count your blessings, and flee. Or display some intestinal fortitude, as Bill says, and throw out the demons who have possessed you, body and soul, and send them back to Khazaria. Im all about and for intestinal fortitude, yet my statement remains true. The law is merely a tool of displaying our ailments, rather than the desired effect of curbing our behaviors for societies sake. No demons can enter this temple, matter of fact, they see me coming they disperse. They know i can see them, they know i can command them.. Life is all good when you tread on snakes. Sadly the opposite is true for far too many, theyve been listening to snakes again. OK, but what can a citizen resort to when a leader in a foreign country seems to have the best interests of the world (including our country) at heart? When a large part of our own government seems to have interests which are not in the best interests of the future of our own country, what can a citizen do, other than flee the state? The further along the road our two major parties go, the worse it gets. Neither the progressive democrats, nor the neo-con republicans have our future at heart other than to relinquish it to a world power. Both parties need to find some sort of intestinal fortitude to thumb their noses at those who threaten them (withholding money, or revealing embarrassment), and have them marching us to the precipice. We need a (Vladimir Putin like?) leader here to say enough is enough. The truth, should it ever be known, is that weve been flooded with treasonous leadership at all levels of politics. Can we survive? Only if we take the blinders off, turn off the stupidity box, take the buds out of our ears, and see what the Hell is going on. (And stop all this Israel is our friend bullshit they are laughing at us, while they dismantle our republic, stone by stone). I did not here War. is it always the liberals put words in the mouths of thier opposites????? They did no such thing! The Democrats did the same thing a few years ago, when Bush was President! It involved Hussein! without authority of the United States,. The United States is the united STATES, NOT the president nor congress, which are both severely limited by the Constitution. All power rests with each individual state. To believe the president or congress actually have the power in the United States speaks volumes about how America has morphed into an Orwellian society where laws and even common sense have been turned on their ear. All power rests with each individual state You obviously didnt read the article because it points out that a precedent has been set; Congress doesnt make foreign policy, that is for the president only. If you read the whole article before commenting, then you wont look like an ignoramus. You obviously dont see whats going on behind the scene! most all senators are guilty of this daily more than likely. the entire bibi incident falls under this category but yet it continues. Correspondence means a back and forth, Congress simply made Iran aware of US Constitutional Law. There is no law breaking in informing another country of our laws. Also note Congress is the only party allowed to make the deal or not agree to the deal, so technically Obama is violating the law by circumventing the authority who is allowed to make the deal and agree to the deal. Hes also undermining our countrys already by trying to get around the Sanctions placed on Iran by Congress. Hmm, what a tangled web we weave. Obama was never given permission to talk to Iran and or make any deals for America. Thus.Obama is breaking the law. Arrest him. Put him in jail for those 3 years. PLEASE! and no matter what the article points out is the President has the authority to make treaties and negotiate. Congress was not negotiating and was not trying to make any new deals. All they said in their letter was no matter what Obama works out with you, he has to get our approval before its binding and legal. Lock up all those Rats and greedy turds for life! America is doomed unless you clean house! I SIGNED THE PETITION! DID YOU GUYS!!?? BI BI NUTTER-YAHOO IS A GREAT INFLUENCE ON TOM COTTON. HE IS ONE OF THE SYCOPHANTS WHO BROUGHT HIM HERE! Number 1 the Logan act dose not apply to the Goverment .( last I heard the senate was part of the Goverment) Take your logan act and stick it where the sun dont shine, there is NOTHING wrong with making sure that iran understands how our constitution works! 