• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

where's my Blue buddies?...a law is a law, right?

yeah, nevermind, I'll just answer for yinz....

" but...but...the (insert punching bag here) did something too!"
 
I think they should just go for the ringleader Cotton. A little behind bars time might do him some good.
 
I guess they are following the president as an example
 
hah, I knew it....

nothing to see here.

except a direct violation of the Logan Act.

"but it's ok, USDA, they did it too."
 
USDA#1 said:
hah, I knew it....

nothing to see here.

except a direct violation of the Logan Act.

"but it's ok, USDA, they did it too."
Click to expand...

Wow, way to misread it.

Did you see this part?

Seems like they overstepped their bounds? Is it different that it is Senate vs. House? Seems unlikely.

While I agree with the sentiment of the Senators, I don't think this is the right way to do it.
Click to expand...

Christ on a ************* crutch. Does that sound like approval?
 
the dinosaur stepped on JC's foot?

see the post above your's?

I'll see yer crutch and raise you a powerchair.
 
USDA#1 said:
yeah, nevermind, I'll just answer for yinz....

" but...but...the (insert punching bag here) did something too!"
Click to expand...
You'd have to jail Hillary and dig up Ted Kennedy and jail him too.
If we're going to start enforcing laws then Bomma is in more trouble than the Senate Republicans.
 
Ron Burgundy said:
You'd have to jail Hillary and dig up Ted Kennedy and jail him too.
If we're going to start enforcing laws then Bomma is in more trouble than the Senate Republicans.
Click to expand...
fine by me...just wondering where all the righteous indignation is from the usuals.
 
USDA#1 said:
yeah, nevermind, I'll just answer for yinz....

" but...but...the (insert punching bag here) did something too!"
Click to expand...

That or they'll just say he's not really the president anyway..err...birth certificate..Kenya...we have to go through congress

Can we still use that disproven stuff? No one sent a memo.

The same congress who by the way looks the other way when Jewish Americans and Christian Americans go and fight in the IDF in clear violation of The Neutrality Act.

You have to love a religion that convinces other idiots that they are "the chosen people"(in the book they wrote of course) then proceeds to oppress others using the money and blood from the largest Christian nation on earth.

We gave 3 billion dollars in foreign aid to Israel last year and with it they 'bought' 19 F-35 fighters...cost: a little over 3 billion dollars.................lol
 
Having read the actual letter I can't see a problem. The Senators do not make any demands or counter negotiations. Nor do the Senators at any point call into question the authority of the administration to speak. It simply points out that any agreement or treaty would have to be ratified by the Senate. They are reminding the President and the Iranians that the deal will have to be acceptable to the Congress in its governmental oversight roll to be anything more than a handshake agreement between the two executives.
 
DBS1970 said:
Having read the actual letter I can't see a problem. The Senators do not make any demands or counter negotiations. Nor do the Senators at any point call into question the authority of the administration to speak. It simply points out that any agreement or treaty would have to be ratified by the Senate. They are reminding the President and the Iranians that the deal will have to be acceptable to the Congress in its governmental oversight roll to be anything more than a handshake agreement between the two executives.
Click to expand...

Bomma kowtow to Congress??? Even work with Congress??? NEVER!!!
 
An article referencing the term "Neo-conservative" in its first paragraph and makes this remark, "The Republicans, who so often talk of the Constitution almost as highly as they talk of their support for Israel..." has shown its bias. Nothing (new) to see here.
 
Fools.

7 Times Democrats Advised America’s Enemies to Oppose the President

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...sed-americas-enemies-to-oppose-the-president/

Senators John Sparkman (D-AL) and George McGovern (D-SD). The two Senators visited Cuba and met with government actors there in 1975. They said that they did not act on behalf of the United States, so the State Department ignored their activity.

Senator Teddy Kennedy (D-MA). In 1983, Teddy Kennedy sent emissaries to the Soviets to undermine Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy. According to a memo finally released in 1991 from head of the KGB Victor Chebrikov to then-Soviet leader Yuri Andropov:

On 9-10 May of this year, Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow. The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.

What was the message? That Teddy would help stifle Reagan’s anti-Soviet foreign policy if the Soviets would help Teddy run against Reagan in 1984. Kennedy offered to visit Moscow to “arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Then he said that he would set up interviews with Andropov in the United States. “Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews…Like other rational people, [Kennedy] is very troubled by the current state of Soviet-American relations,” the letter explained. The memo concluded:

Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988. Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president.

House Speaker Jim Wright (D-TX). In 1984, 10 Democrats sent a letter to Daniel Ortega Saavedra, the head of the military dictatorship in Nicaragua, praising Saavedra for “taking steps to open up the political process in your country.” House Speaker Jim Wright signed the letter.

In 1987, Wright worked out a deal to bring Ortega to the United States to visit with lawmakers. As The New York Times reported:

There were times when the White House seemed left out of the peace process, uninformed, irritated. ”We don’t have any idea what’s going on,” an Administration official said Thursday. And there was a bizarre atmosphere to the motion and commotion: the leftist Mr. Ortega, one of President Reagan’s arch enemies, heads a Government that the Administration has been trying to overthrow by helping to finance a war that has killed thousands of Nicaraguans on both sides. Yet he was freely moving around Washington, visiting Mr. Wright in his Capitol Hill office, arguing his case in Congress and at heavily covered televised news conferences. He criticized President Reagan; he recalled that the United States, whose troops intervened in Nicaragua several times between 1909 and 1933, had supported the Somoza family dictatorship which lasted for 43 years until the Sandinistas overthrew it in 1979.

Ortega then sat next to Wright as he presented a “detailed cease-fire proposal.” The New York Times said, “Mr. Ortega seemed delighted to turn to Mr. Wright.”

Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry jumped into the pro-Sandanista pool himself in 1985, when he traveled to Nicaragua to negotiate with the regime. He wasn’t alone; Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) joined him. The Christian Science Monitor reported that the two senators “brought back word that Mr. Ortega would be willing to accept a cease-fire if Congress rejected aid to the rebels…That week the House initially voted down aid to the contras, and Mr. Ortega made an immediate trip to Moscow.” Kerry then shilled on behalf of the Ortega government:

We are still trying to overthrow the politics of another country in contravention of international law, against the Organization of American States charter. We negotiated with North Vietnam. Why can we not negotiate with a country smaller than North Carolina and with half the population of Massachusetts? It’s beyond me. And the reason is that they just want to get rid of them [the Sandinistas], they want to throw them out, they don’t want to talk to them.

Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA), David Bonior (D-MI), and Mike Thompson (D-CA). In 2002, the three Congressmen visited Baghdad to play defense for Saddam Hussein’s regime. There, McDermott laid the groundwork for the Democratic Party’s later rip on President George W. Bush, stating, “the president of the United States will lie to the American people in order to get us into this war.” McDermott, along with his colleagues, suggested that the American administration give the Iraqi regime “due process” and “take the Iraqis on their face value.” Bonior said openly he was acting on behalf of the government:

The purpose of our trip was to make it very clear, as I said in my opening statement, to the officials in Iraq how serious we–the United States is about going to war and that they will have war unless these inspections are allowed to go unconditionally and unfettered and open. And that was our point. And that was in the best interest of not only Iraq, but the American citizens and our troops. And that’s what we were emphasizing. That was our primary concern–that and looking at the humanitarian situation.

Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). In 2002, Rockefeller told Fox News’ Chris Wallace, “I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.” That would have given Saddam Hussein fourteen months in which to prepare for war.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). In April 2007, as the Bush administration pursued pressure against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to visit him. There, according to The New York Times, the two “discussed a variety of Middle Eastern issues, including the situations in Iraq and Lebanon and the prospect of peace talks between Syria and Israel.” Pelosi was accompanied by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-CA), Tom Lantos (D-CA), Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), Nick J. Rahall II (D-WV), and Keith Ellison (D-MN). Zaid Haider, Damascus bureau chief for Al Safir, reportedly said, ‘There is a feeling now that change is going on in American policy – even if it’s being led by the opposition.”
Click to expand...

The US hasn't enforced the Logan Act before.

Leave it to Liberals to want to do so now.

What's the phrase, "What's good for the Goose...?"
 
hamster said:
So you agree that Congress may have transgressed the law, but was morally acceptable?
Click to expand...

No, both cases involved racism and true human morality fighting against immoral laws.

The case now just involves money,lobbying, and to a lesser extent religious kooks who are also politicians..... but mainly money.
 
Elfiero said:
Can you find an academic source for any of that? I'd appreciate it, something besides a right wing blog?

I couldn't.....not a one.
Click to expand...

Since you despise these right wingers and dispute their facts, why don't you quit acting like a lazy ******** and simply do the work yourself?

Take one of the examples from the link and disprove it. If you cannot disprove it, it would hold that it is true.

This is the neat thing about facts. They are true or not true and that is independent of the origin of the facts.

I know you feel beholden to academics you think much smarter than yourself, but I think you should be a confident woman and take personal responsibility for disproving these facts you dispute.

Act like an independent thinker, and show us your work.
 
 
Confluence said:
Since you despise these right wingers and dispute their facts, why don't you quit acting like a lazy ******** and simply do the work yourself?

Take one of the examples from the link and disprove it. If you cannot disprove it, it would hold that it is true.

This is the neat thing about facts. They are true or not true and that is independent of the origin of the facts.

I know you feel beholden to academics you think much smarter than yourself, but I think you should be a confident woman and take personal responsibility for disproving these facts you dispute.

Act like an independent thinker, and show us your work.
Click to expand...

Is that how it works? Did you miss the part where I said I COULDN'T?

I guess I have to worry about being abducted now...... you know since I can't disprove it and I found it on a blog..it must be true!

a97917_bettyandreasson.jpg


http://www.oddee.com/item_97917.aspx


On January 25, 1967, homemaker Betty Andreasson and her family were astounded when the electricity in their home suddenly went out and a bright red light shined in through their kitchen window. When the family looked outside, they saw five creatures "hopping" towards their house; the creatures then came straight through the solid wood door and instantly put the entire Andreasson clan into a trance.

The aliens were described by Betty and her father as being short and without usual human characteristics, and one of them was clearly the leader. They communicated only telepathically, and Betty felt calm and unconcerned even while everyone but herself and her father were in a state of suspended animation. Betty was then taken aboard a spacecraft and was given invasive (and sometimes painful) examinations. Roughly four hours later, Betty was returned to her family and the aliens released them all from their trance and hypnotized Betty so that she would forget much about her time on the mother ship.

Thank you for the lesson on "thinking" CONman.
 
Tim Steelersfan said:
Are you in the least bit serious? Incorrigible.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/te...eagan-opinions-columnists-peter-robinson.html
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/11/15/w...stas-launch-an-offensive-on-capitol-hill.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-communist-sandinista-leader-1985_733873.html
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/001/737zcgnk.asp
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/04/world/middleeast/04cnd-pelosi.html?_r=1&

Now, just go away.
Click to expand...

I'll go away right after I dispatch you quickly.

Two right wing publications and the times...none of those are academic, but I'll still deal with your nonsense.

I read up on Ortega and his meeting with Wright A MEETING!(don't get me started on Reagan's attempts to overthrow a legit gov.)This is not the same as trying to undermine the foreign policy of the U.S. out of hatred for the administration. The Kennedy incident as far as I can tell is all hearsay, the Cuba trip was also not outside norms.

Doesn't matter because none of those supposed incidents are similar to what the Repugnicans are doing now.

The Senate historian says this is "unprecedented" as far as he has researched it.

“We haven’t found a precedent,” said Senate Historian Donald Ritchie. “That doesn’t mean there isn’t a precedent. After 200 years. It’s hard to find anything that unprecedented.”

In the past, Ritchie said, “what usually happened is a senator would sign a ‘round robin’ letter or a sense of the Senate resolution, or write a letter to the president or secretary of State voicing objections to some particular policy.

Individual senators have also on occasion met with the foreign leaders on policy issues, Ritchie said. In this case, he said his office conducted a general search on disarmament issues to see if an episode similar to the Iran letter could be found.

“We really didn’t find anything,” Ritchie said.

Alan K. Henrikson, director of Diplomatic Studies and a professor of diplomatic history at Tufts University, said the Republicans’ letter “undercuts” how America conducts international diplomacy.

“Neither the Senate nor the House has sought to interfere with actual conduct of negotiations by writing an open letter to the leadership of a country with which the U.S. is negotiating,” said Henrikson, who teaches at Tufts’ Fletcher School of international affairs

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/03/10/259257/precedent-for-gops-iran-letter.html#storylink=cpy

The GOP is full of such despicable scumbags that they'll undermine and endanger U.S. military and innocent civilian lives just to get their way, just like petulant children.

All arising from the hatred of the black man in the white house...oh excuse me let me try to relate to CONservatives: "the n***** in the white house".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JMM
Local politician above the law,,,thanks to,,,,,the law
Replies
4
Views
78
JMM
JMM
Steeltime
The Kurt Schlichter Update
Replies
1
Views
119
wig
W
Tim Steelersfan
The Dexter Reed Hoax
Replies
17
Views
321
IndySteel
IndySteel
Steeltime
"Nobody is above the law."
Replies
2
Views
69
DBS1970
DBS1970
bermudasteel
Trouble in paradise or is Christmas coming early???
Replies
15
Views
607
steel dino
steel dino
Top