The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on September 16, 2008, 09:10:12 AM
-
In the New York Post, conservative Iranian-born columnist Amir Taheri quoted Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari as saying the Democrat made the demand when he visited Baghdad in July, while publicly demanding an early withdrawal.
“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,†Zebari said in an interview, according to Taheri.
“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open,†Zebari reportedly said. …
Obama’s national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said Taheri’s article bore “as much resemblance to the truth as a McCain campaign commercial.â€
In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a “Strategic Framework Agreement†governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hi9TDNHvuBZpFsO8ZbiFYsnbIl3A
Team O are a bunch of idiots. How do you deny something but admitting you did exactly what you're accused of.
Nonetheless, Obama sought to throw the Iraq war to advance his political career--which means more lives soldiers and Iraqis thrown away in a cynical powerplay--not to mention the violation of the president's constitutionally enumerated powers and the Logan Act.
It looks like the Constittution is above his paygrade as well...even though he lists constitutional lawyer on his resume.
-
But Obama's national security spokeswoman Wendy Morigi said . . . .
In fact, Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office, she said.
In the face of resistance from Bush, the Democrat has long said that any such agreement must be reviewed by the US Congress as it would tie a future administration's hands on Iraq.
"Barack Obama has never urged a delay in negotiations, nor has he urged a delay in immediately beginning a responsible drawdown of our combat brigades," Morigi said.
looks like an admission to me. don't delay the negotiations, just delay the actual agreement? why? because it would (a) remove it as a campaign issue, to the extent that it still exists as one, and (b) make it impossible to claim credit for it in the first few weeks of a hypothetical obama administration.
having said all of that, it's interference in the conduct of us foreign policy.
-
a google news search for "logan act" this morning revealed exactly 7 hits, none of them from the MSM. palin and troopergate? about 3,000.
(by the way, MSB, I think this would play better in the elections forum)
-
Well, here's the info on the logan act:
http://www.answers.com/topic/logan-act
Clearly, if the reoprts from Iraq are true, Obama has violated this law. The only question is, will anything at all be done? WHERE'S THE REPORTING!
-
Well, here's the info on the logan act:
http://www.answers.com/topic/logan-act
Clearly, if the reoprts from Iraq are true, Obama has violated this law. The only question is, will anything at all be done? WHERE'S THE REPORTING!
it's nowhere. the MSM is busier ignoring this story than they were john edwards' love child.
-
This sounds like what they wanted to impeach 41 for back in the day. There were dozens of books written on "the october surprise" of 1980 that fell through because the Iranians wouldn't deal with Carter till after the election. There was speculation that the Reagan people made a deal.
Of course, there were all kinds of weird stories about Bush riding the jump seat of an SR-71 in order to meet with the Iranians. It started bizare and got worse.
those who remember this also remember how much heat it generated for a while. And when the guy who claimed to have watched Bush meet with the Iranians was proved to be in Seattle that time and day, it was was also amazing how fast it went down the memory hole.
But keep blogging folks. They can't ignore it too long
-
This sounds like what they wanted to impeach 41 for back in the day. There were dozens of books written on "the october surprise" of 1980 that fell through because the Iranians wouldn't deal with Carter till after the election. There was speculation that the Reagan people made a deal...
Damn good point.
Take it over to the lefties at the toy box (I'm assuming that's you by the same name).
-
Not really a dupe but this dovetails nicely - http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,13688.0.html
-
Wait, isn't this the guy who gets all testy when McCain says that he (McCain) would rather lose a campaign than lose a war? Isn't Barack the guy who says that's tantamount to questioning his patriotism? Then he pulls something like this, in direct violation of the separation of powers and contrary to US foreign policy?
-
Not really a dupe but this dovetails nicely - http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,13688.0.html
we have this story in several pieces, in fact. I posted posted the NY post story, you posted the mccain response, and MSB has the obama campaign's response to the response, which is turning out to be the more interesting of the three.
(I have thought about combining them, but haven't found the time so far this morning. and they work pretty well as stand alone threads . . . .)
-
Wait, isn't this the guy who gets all testy when McCain says that he (McCain) would rather lose a campaign than lose a war? Isn't Barack the guy who says that's tantamount to questioning his patriotism? Then he pulls something like this, in direct violation of the separation of powers and contrary to US foreign policy?
it is potentially a violation of the logan act.
-
Yes, they do stand alone as separate threads.
I'm not surprised this isn't getting coverage though. Damned MSM.
-
Reagan never went to Iran, at least that I can remember. Iran was afraid of Reagan because of his rough and ready cowboy style. They knew better than to mess with Reagan.
-
Gary Sick wrote a book claiming G. Bush 41, before the Regan election, flew to France to get the Iranians to hold the Embassy people until after the election, sinking Carter. Reality tells us that the Iranians would PREFER Carter, so they's have RELEASED them just before the election if anything.
Gary Sick was proved wrong, and the LWN's still, from time to time, bring the incident forward as if it were fact and not fraud.
-
Well, here's the info on the logan act:
http://www.answers.com/topic/logan-act
Clearly, if the reoprts from Iraq are true, Obama has violated this law. The only question is, will anything at all be done? WHERE'S THE REPORTING!
Probably nothing will come of it because of previous attempts by certain Democratic Senators past dealings with Vietnam and Nicaragua. Those Democratic Senators being John F'fen Kerry,Who served in Vietnam and Sen. Tom Harkin who joined Kerry on his Central American trip to visit Danny Ortiega
-
The original NY Post article...
WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.
According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.
"He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington," Zebari said in an interview.
Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops - and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its "state of weakness and political confusion."
(more...) (http://www.nypost.com/seven/09152008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/obama_tried_to_stall_gis_iraq_withdrawal_129150.htm)
-
This is a constitutional scholar?
-
This is a constitutional scholar?
I believe he taught civil rights law at the university of chicago, which would go a long ways toward explaining his "the ends justify any means" approach to things.
-
Curiously there was a mention on the DUmp about the Logan Act. However, that was when they thought they might get McCain with it.
In addition, after watching Barack Obama behaving "presidential" on his recent world tour -- meeting with foreign leaders, mingling with U.S. troops, flying around Iraq in a helicopter with General Petraeus, addressing hundreds of thousands of admirers in Germany, etc. -- McCain felt insulted, diminished, unable to respond in kind. He was reduced to visiting a German sausage restaurant in Pennsylvania.
So, offered the gift of an ongoing war in Georgia, McCain decided now it is his turn to act "presidential." So he said he'd be dispatching his envoys (Lieberman and Graham) to Georgia on a "fact-finding" mission -- which, if they engage in any kind of negotiations with the parties there, would be a serious violation of the Logan Act, which states that only the Executive branch is authorized to do so. And McCain, backed up by his neo-con chorus, is calling, in essence, for a return to the Cold War against "evil" Russia.
This (http://journals.democraticunderground.com/CrisisPapers/190) Was from one of their Crisis papers on DU.
-
Actually, if they were dispached by the Pres. and spoke within the limitations imposed, it was perfectly lawful. Contrary to the DUfuses contention, they regularly break the law, then pretend they didn't or they "forgot" etc. See Rangle for the spinningest Pol. this month, so far.