Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

McCain Revives Immigration Debate -- in Spanish Only

By Ed O'Keefe
The McCain campaign has started airing a new Spanish-language television commercial in the battleground states of Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico that lays the failure of comprehensive immigration reform at the feet of Barack Obama and his Democratic colleagues -- despite the fact that Obama supported the bipartisan John McCain-Edward Kennedy efforts to enact such reforms and voted for their final proposal last year.

That's got Obama surrogates and leaders of some Hispanic groups raising questions similar to those that have greeted McCain's English language spots, which have had their accuracy challenged by a number of media and independent group observers.

"Obama and his Congressional allies say they are on the side of immigrants," the ad's announcer says in Spanish in the spot, released Friday. "But are they? The press reports that their efforts were 'poison pills' that made immigration reform fail. The result: No guest worker program. No path to citizenship. No secure borders. No reform. Is that being on our side? Obama and his Congressional allies: Ready to block immigration reform, but not ready to lead."

In truth, Obama and many other Democrats publicly supported the efforts to enact immigration reforms started by Sens. McCain and Kennedy (D-Mass.) in 2005. Obama voted for last year's final bipartisan proposals, but faced criticism for sponsoring changes to a temporary worker program that later failed, and Senate colleagues described him as "notably absent" during negotiations.

Today, Obama says he backs an approach that "protects our security, bolsters our economy, and preserves America's tradition as a nation of immigrants who are welcomed as long as they work hard and play by the rules" -- and he recently told a Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute gathering, "I think it's time for a president who won't walk away from comprehensive immigration reform when it becomes politically unpopular."

Obama's supporters had harsh words for the McCain spot. "To say that Barack Obama and Senate Democrats blocked the bill that Republicans filibustered is hypocritical and not true. John McCain has lost his credibility when it comes to the immigration issue," Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said in a statement released by the Obama campaign Friday.

"The man who said he would vote against his own immigration bill during the Republican presidential debates, who was unwilling to stand up to his own party when they approved an anti-immigrant platform, cannot attack Democrats on immigration in Spanish, while pandering to the extreme right Tancredo wing of the Republican Party in English."

Some Hispanic groups agree with Menendez.

"The Latino community has been watching this issue very closely," says Cecilia Muñoz, a senior vice president with National Council of La Raza who notes that immigration legislation failed because a majority of Republican senators voted against the measures.

Muñoz says that McCain's tone has shifted on the issue since he spoke with Latino groups this summer, openly discussing the failure of immigration reform legislation at NCLR's San Diego conference and denouncing those that have injected a harsher tone into the debate.

"What's interesting about this contrast is that it represents a real shift, and I'm not sure it's a shift that Latino voters are going to buy," Muñoz said today on a conference call with reporters designed specifically to respond to the McCain ad. Muñoz was joined on the call by representatives from America's Voice and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund.

These days neither candidate has much to say about "immigration," perhaps because it's an issue of little importance to voters nationwide. Last week's Washington Post-ABC News poll ranked immigration as the ninth-most important issue among registered voters, with only 1 percent calling it their main concern.

It is still an issue of concern for Latino voters, however, even if it ranks low in national polls. A July survey by the Pew Hispanic Center ranked immigration below economic issues and the War in Iraq, but Muñoz says it "is kind of a threshold issue. It tends to determine who the good guys are and the bad guys are for Latinos.

"Immigration may not make the top three on the list, but it is a strong motivator for Latinos voters," she said.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 15, 2008; 4:07 PM ET
Categories:  Barack Obama , Channel 08 , John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Biden Steps Up Criticism of McCain
Next: Palin Impersonators Strip for Their Supper

Comments

Spanish were settling Florida in the 1500s, 100s of years before English was heard in Florida. Florida is a Spanish word! Pensacola (a Spanish word), originated as a Spanish settlement.

St Augustine, Florida is the oldest settlement in what is now the United States...and originally a Spanish settlement.

In short, Hispanics discovered Florida!

Heck, the State of Florida will begin offering a license plate stating; Hispanics discovered Florida!

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/state/orl-hispplate2608jun26,0,6794178.story

As such, why SHOULDN'T Spanish be spoken in Florida? Florida history is Hispanic after all!

Similarly, California is a Spanish word! The names of California towns like San Diego, Los Angeles, San Jose, San Francisco, Sacramento, etc are all Spanish!

Same is true in Texas, New Mexico.

San Antonio? Santa Fe? Las Vegas? Pueblo?

Nevada is Spanish for snowy!

Colorado is Spanish for red!

Given all of this Hispanic heritage , why SHOULDN'T Spanish be spoken in these regions and beyond!

The fact is, no other language, save French, comes close in historical ties to America as Spanish does!

What next, you want to change the names of Florida, California, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and all those towns with Spanish names too?

This is America, speak Spanish...and English too!

Posted by: @ Stenbo | September 19, 2008 3:26 AM | Report abuse

It is outrageous that the presidential candidates are having a advertising battle that the vast majority of U.S. CITIZENS are not privy to because the commercials are not in English! We care about this election. We want to know what is being said!

Enough of this pandering to Hispanics with Spanish language everything. It decreases the likelihood they will ever learn English, it is discriminatory to all our other immigrants, it is divisive and it is un-American. The main reason that our immigrants become Americans is that we all speak the same language. It is appalling that presidential candidates would jeopardize that unity for crass political gain.

McCain and Obama must redo those commercials in English, and abstain from all foreign language commercials in future. This is America!

Posted by: stenbo | September 18, 2008 4:31 AM | Report abuse

I have lost nothing DC50.

If you think you won the argument think again. Your racist upbringing and excuses to display them in public will soon be a thing of the past. However, I feel sorry for you when you have to face the Lord who sees everything and explain your actions. How can you attack the defenseless? How can you invent so many lies about people who mean you no harm? I will pray for you DC50. I hope you really think over who you are attacking and why. Analyze the veracity of your information before making such judgements and statements.

Again check the true facts:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/07/16/american-legion-immigration-report-replete-with-falsehoods/

"Evil is the absence of God"
-Einstein


Posted by: TCP/IP | September 17, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

I keep seeing this, "It's the law" rhetoric. Well, U.S. history has taught us that legality DOES NOT always equate to JUSTICE. There are plenty of examples of that by the way.

In fact, not so long ago a certain minority group was not allowed to vote....and that was the law too.

By the way, crossing a desert for three days and risking your life is not the EASY way in....sometimes it's the only way in. It makes me wonder why would an immigrant risk his life to make it to this country?

What would Jesus say?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 17, 2008 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Four point plan to solve the illegal alien invasion!

1) Build triple layer, 50 foot high, border wall. Moats should separate each layer of the border wall.

2) Task the US military to patrol the border wall with land mines and snipers.

3) Revoke birthright citizenship for all US born children of illegal aliens...RETROACTIVELY...to about 1970.

4) Encourage Americans to execute citizens arrest of illegal aliens. Organized groups like the minutemen could then go round up ALL the illegal aliens!

Adios illegal mexicans!

Posted by: John Wayne - Texas | September 17, 2008 5:31 AM | Report abuse

TCP\IP is angry because he lost the argument.
You can't win this argument TCP/IP WHY?

Because illegal immigration is wrong and against the law, Mexico doesn't allow illegal immigration in their country yet call Americans racists for not allowing it here. You and your La Raza partners only use RACISM because it's your only defense.

Posted by: DC50 | September 16, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

THE FEDERAL SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) ENFORCEMENT ONLY LAW AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION! LAST CHANCE FOR AMERICA, BEFORE WE ARE OVERRUN.! WE ARE HEADING FOR OVERPOPULATION! No help from Obama or McCain?
THE MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS ARE HOLDING UP THIS IMMIGRATION LAW. IT WILL BUILD A TWO-TIER FENCE AS ORIGINALLY FUNDED. MANDATORY ENFORCEMENT AT THE EMPLOYER LEVEL. NO MORE CHAIN MIGRATION. WE ALREADY HAVE 27 GUEST WORKER PROGRAMS, NO MORE JOBS, ILLEGAL FOREIGN NATIONALS WILL LEAVE & GO HOME. THIS IS CALLED ATTRITION! READ THIS POTENTIAL LAW at http://www.numbersusa.com/PDFs/SAVEActSBS.pdf

JOIN 756.000 other American patriots at www.numbersusa.com , to stop the travesty of our immigration laws. Learn about Immigration governmental corruption at www.judicialwatch.org DEMAND YOUR DEMOCRATS SENATORS & CONGRESSMAN VOTE FOR THE FEDERAL SAVE ACT!

Posted by: Brittanicus | September 16, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Comprehensive immigration reform with path to citizenship is a matter of when, not if, despite all the racist monsters living in this country! Billy Bob is on the wrong side of both history and demographics on this one!

Posted by: Cohen | September 16, 2008 11:29 AM "

Given the current economic crisis which is likely to have its effects felt for a decade or more, you can pretty well count on any amnesty being off the table for at least that long. Congress is having to go through too many machinations to even discuss expanding green cards to 550,000, not to know that immigration, legal or illegal, is a very sensitive topic in this economy.

Posted by: Ali | September 16, 2008 4:14 PM | Report abuse

STOP IMPORTING POVERTY...?

I'm sure its not being built to original specifications, as the Democratic leadership has seen to that. At its inception, the border fence was (TWO) fences parallel to each other, with a no mans land in between. Inside the perimeter fences was a graded road for US Border Patrol to use for speedy detainment of drug smugglers, illegal aliens caught between the two obstacles. Originally designed by Rep. Duncan hunter (R-CA) it would have achieved its goal, as the his first project stretching from Mexican national border into San Diego. Alas, the Democrats have started gutting the fence construction. President Bush has recalled the National Guard and leaving a thin, resilient line of border agents, to stop the never ending millions fleeing poverty in third world countries. Like always gullible Americans have been sold a 'bill of goods" that will never stop the occupational armies of cheap labor. Obviously, the Bush Administration, House leader and her household, have no thought for the American people and their jobs. Otherwise the original wall would have been built, where only the athletic foreign national would have scaled the last high-rise fence.

JOIN 756.000 other American patriots at www.numbersusa.com , to stop the travesty of our immigration laws. Learn about Immigration governmental corruption at www.judicialwatch.org DEMAND YOUR DEMOCRATS SENATORS & CONGRESSMAN VOTE FOR THE FEDERAL SAVE ACT!

Posted by: Brittanicus | September 16, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

TCP/IP: You twit! When the Republic of Ireland wanted to cut a separate amnesty deal with the US last December for the approximately 50,000 white, English-speaking Irish illegally in the USA, FAIR and NumbersUSA and other similar groups OPPOSED it! Why? Because these groups oppose ALL illegal immigration! The SPLC classifies ALL groups that want stricter immigration controls and oppose a path to citizenship for illegals as "hate groups". Do you really think that's true? That every group and every citizen in the USA who opposes a path to citizenship and wants to see the laws enforced is racist???

CamiloAndres: CamiloAndres: No somos racistas o fascistas. Amamos nuestra nacion, y solamente queremos ver que ella continua ser una gran nacion. Espero que los ciudadanos hispanicos piensen de su nacion primero y su raza segundo cuando votan en noviembre.

Posted by: Rex | September 16, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

DC50 wrote: ...Many Hispanics are Minutemen and woman! ... The real racists with their Mexican Flags...
_________________________________________

Typical of you. Taking a comment and implying something else. Spreading your lies everywhere and NOWHERE!

I'm not saying illegal immigration is right you dumb butt! But you use this issue as an excuse to hide your racism and increase racist sentiment.

First you attack immigrants, then it will be people with brown skin, then those with "funny" last names... NUMBERSUSA and FAIR are just a continuation of the Klu Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups. People are too smart for your lies DC50.

Check out the truth:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/07/16/american-legion-immigration-report-replete-with-falsehoods/

"Evil is the absence of God"
-Einstein

Posted by: TCP\IP | September 16, 2008 12:22 PM | Report abuse

DC50 wrote: ...Many Hispanics are Minutemen and woman! ... The real racists with their Mexican Flags...

Typical of you. Taking a comment and implying something else. Spreading your lies everywhere and NOWHERE!

I'm not saying illegal immigration is right you dumb butt! But you use this issue as an excuse to hide your racism and increase racist sentiment.

First you attack immigrants, then it will be people with brown skin, then those with "funny" last names... NUMBERSUSA and FAIR are just a continuation of the Klu Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups. People are too smart for your lies DC50.

Check out the truth:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/07/16/american-legion-immigration-report-replete-with-falsehoods/

"Evil is the absence of God"
-Einstein


Posted by: TCP\IP | September 16, 2008 12:20 PM | Report abuse

tcpip:
The only racist xenophobes groups here are those of FAIR and NumbersUSA. The founders of these groups have openly and in public expressed their racist sentiment towards hispanics. This is the same BS that you and people like you eat gladly.

Check out this link for information about the real racism and the KKK still alive in the good ol' USA:
------------------------------------------

Nice try at your La Raza propaganda Rex!
Many Hispanics feel illegal immigration in any color is wrong.
Many Hispanics are Minutemen and woman!

http://dontspeakforme.org/

The real racists with their Mexican Flags
can be seen at U-Tube attacking Americans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMXZhThiVEw

Posted by: DC50 | September 16, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain for el Presidente!!!

Vote for McCain!

Posted by: ElPresidente | September 16, 2008 11:57 AM
--------------------------------------

President of what? Mexico?

Posted by: Pit | September 16, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

McCain for el Presidente!!!

Vote for McCain!

Posted by: ElPresidente | September 16, 2008 11:57 AM | Report abuse

I hate Obama's liberal views and who else is there to vote for?
UGH! McCain!
McCain is now considered the lesser of the 2 evils.
It has come to this Americans.
Creep 1 or Creep 2.

Hopefully if McCain makes it he will become too ill and step down and Palin will be President.
At least she is more conservative.

Posted by: DC50 | September 16, 2008 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Rex:

The only racist xenophobes groups here are those of FAIR and NumbersUSA. The founders of these groups have openly and in public expressed their racist sentiment towards hispanics. This is the same BS that you and people like you eat gladly.

Check out this link for information about the real racism and the KKK still alive in the good ol' USA:

SEE THE TRUTH:

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2008/07/16/american-legion-immigration-report-replete-with-falsehoods/

"Evil is the absence of God"
-Einstein

Posted by: TCP\IP | September 16, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

Ive given up on the 2008 election, I am not the only one.
http://www.skip08.com

Posted by: Anonymous | September 16, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Comprehensive immigration reform with path to citizenship is a matter of when, not if, despite all the racist monsters living in this country! Billy Bob is on the wrong side of both history and demographics on this one!

Posted by: Cohen | September 16, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

La Raza is a racist organization because it looks out for Hispanics first and everyone else in the US second...if at all. On top of that, Cecilia Munoz is The Chief Racist among them, and serves as Janet Murguia's attack dog. Remember that racism isn't only being against a group of people because of their physical characteristics or heritage; it is also being solely FOR one group at the exclusion of all others for those exact same reasons.

Do more than just express your anger here! Call your elected reps (federal, state, and local), join one of the many non-racist anti-illegal immigration groups like FAIR and NumbersUSA, talk to your family and friends who may not know much about this issue or care much about it, make service providers (such as landscapers, movers, etc.) prove that they are not using illegal immigrants. As with most things in life, the most committed wins. Take back control of your country before it's too late!

Posted by: Rex | September 16, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

No ILLEGAL ALIEN left behind when I am El Presidente!

Posted by: Juan McAmnesty | September 16, 2008 10:50 AM | Report abuse

Juan McAmnesty strikes again!

Posted by: Michael Scott | September 16, 2008 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Immigration per se may not rank high in your polls, but I'd be willing to bet that jobs and the economy do. Neither candidate is willing to tell AMERICANS IN GENERAL just how they plan to create GOOD jobs for millions of AMERICANS who are out of work and simultaneously legalize 20 million illegal aliens who will compete with us for those jobs. And how will the candidates address the issue of healthcare and who pays for it without addressing the fact that a substantial number of the 47 million uninsured in this country are illegal aliens whose healthcare we already subsidize. Then there's education. We already have tough competition for entry to good schools and for financing education, yet the candidates want the DREAM Act and access to financing and scholarships for literally ANY "student" who lands in the U.S. In short, amnesty and "guest worker" programs are intimately tied with major issues that Americans ARE concerned about.

Posted by: Ali | September 16, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

Cuba and Mexico are laughing. It is not America anymore. Tell it like it is. And, Where is VP Palin??

Posted by: justadad55+ | September 16, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

What is McCain doing to keep these corporations from outsourcing ? These firms do not Employ ONE UNDOCUMENTED PERSON !
IBM, MAYTAG, FORD, HP,

THIS IS IN TODAYS NEWS,
"Hewlett-Packard Co. said Monday it will cut about 7.5 percent of its work force -- or about 24600 employees -- as part of its integration of Electronic Data Systems Corp."

GOOD LUCK, ITS WORLD GLOBALIZATION, AUTOMATION & ROBOTICS THAT IS HURTING USA , NOT POOR FOOD PICKIN,DISHWASHIN MIGRANTS.

Posted by: truth | September 16, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

Note the deep-seated spite of the commenter 24AheadDotCom. 1st on this page.

That's the Republican base, right there. And you wonder why they're so infamous for lies, hate and hypocrisy.


Many in their base have already bought into the "Obama is muslim" notion. If that doesn't say it all, what does. It's a lie, that plays on xenophobic prejudices on top of it. It's the devil's work. Except they wear sheep's clothes.

Posted by: 5456 | September 16, 2008 5:36 AM | Report abuse

This election is a toilet and the candidates are two big turds. Flush them both and vote for a 3rd party.
Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same coin. It's all about power and money and oil and war.

Posted by: Shewolf | September 16, 2008 4:47 AM | Report abuse

Please stop the BS about Sarah palin being a "great reformer" Don't you see it in her face??? Another Bush behind those glasses? and how about McCain? 95% of the time voted with Bush. It's time for change. It's Obama time!!!

LA FAMILIA HISPANA entiende que los republicanos son unos mentirosos racistas hipocritas. Varias personas de calidad vieron sus sue~os y esperanzas destruidas a trizas por unos pocos xenofobos anti-imigrantes republicanos. Familias han sido separadas y los republicanos lo q buscan al final es dejar a los hispanos como ciudadanos de segunda o tercera clase. primero son los imigrantes, luego todos aquellos que tienen piel morena o apellido "especial"... Si, McCain primero apoyo la reforma, pero ahora ni la menciona e incluso dijo que si llegara a su despacho, votaria en contra de ella. Pero todo esto lo dice en ingles para las voces de miedo, racismo, odio y egoismo. En cambio los mensajes en espa~ol solo dicen mentiras acerca de Obama para tratar de confundirnos. Bueno pues escuchen republicanos!! Los latinos no son estupidos. Los unicos estupidos son ustedes gastando todo ese dinero en comerciales que nosotros ya sabemos son falsos. Obama si quiere la reforma migratoria para todos aquellos imigrantes honestos y responsables. Ademas el si cuenta con un plan economico para ayudar a la gente de bajos y medios recursos. No como McCain/Palin que solo buscan hacer a los ricos mas ricos (2% de la poblacion total de los E.U) y el resto q se jodan!

Se~or McCain, yo solia admirarlo.. viendo por CSPAN los debates en el senado acerca de imigracion. Tuve mucha alegria escuchando como Ted Kennedy y Dick Durbin pusieron todo su corazon y voluntad para tratar de llegar a un acuerdo. Pero al final llore de ver la injusticia, mentiras, y odio proveniente de los republicanos como Jeff Sessions y otros como Sensebrenner. QUE LE PASO A USTED MCCAIN? Ya esta oyendo las voces de los ciudadanos AMERICANOS? o las voces de aquellos pocos pero bien organizados racistas que se esconden en su partido politico?

De una cosa si estoy seguro. Y es q la ley del universo tiende a equilibrar todas las cosas. Toda accion genera una reaccion.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Posted by: CamiloAndres | September 16, 2008 2:47 AM | Report abuse


muy buena canción en español!!!
good song in spanish!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ky8Hvq-F0U

We want our troops back. enough with the republican lies.

Posted by: Hispanos por Obama | September 16, 2008 2:31 AM | Report abuse

What a waste of money to air these lies in Spanish.

La mayoria de los Latinos sabemos quien realmente nos entiende.

Latinos for Obama!
Obama/Biden 08!

Posted by: Antonio | September 16, 2008 1:36 AM | Report abuse

SI, MUY BIEN!
NOSOTROS ENTENDEMOS QUE BARACA ES CACA!

ALASKA LOVES SARAH for the great work she has done reforming government to work for the citizens, and AMERICA IS FALLING IN LOVE WITH SARAH for her genuine sincerity, honesty and brilliant mind.

It is time to recognize that women can do a great job, many times better than men and Sarah Palin's record shows she is exceptional.

The Obama campaign and the liberal media is in disarray, confused and foaming at the mouth after the Maverick, John McCain chose Sarah Palin, a woman reformer for VP. Their response has been a vicious attack on Sarah ranging from insults to smearing and the sexist tactics that brought Hillary's campaign crashing down.

Obama fractured and divided the democratic party when he rejected the choice of 18 million democrats and instead of choosing Hillary for VP, he chose an old Washington politician Joe Biden, and by this grave mistake in choice, negated the flag of "change" Obama had been waiving and replaced it with the "more of the same" one.

On the other side, The Maverick stole the mantra of change from Barack when he selected a woman reformer for VP, who has gained the respect of the State she governs as well as of the nation governors.

The McCain/Palin ticket has also given hope to all the 18 million former Hillary supporters who now have a very compelling reason to vote for the republican ticket, as a way to put their country first by electing a president that has the qualifications, experience and love for our country and at the same time elect a woman to the White House as equal partners in governance and leadership of our country.

Country First!
DEMOCRATS FOR McCain/Palin!

Posted by: Manolete | September 15, 2008 10:54 PM | Report abuse

[url=http://einstein.phys.uwm.edu/view_profile.php?userid=344489]avodart no
[/url]

Posted by: avodeinst | September 15, 2008 10:21 PM | Report abuse

Update- First mention of this Story on CNN tonight - Lou Dobbs is on it- Obama campaign, of course denies....stay Tuned
if Lou nails down the story, the game is over...

___________________

National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Update- First CNN mention of this Story on CNN tonight - Lou Dobbs is on it- Obama campaign, of course denies....stay Tuned
if Lou nails down the story, the game is over...

___________________

National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 10:02 PM | Report abuse

So th Double-Talk Express can lie in two languages. When Karl Rove is embarrassed by the lies McCain tells, you know McCain has sunk as low as he can go.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 15, 2008 9:20 PM | Report abuse

The fact that McCain would bring out this corpse of an issue is, frankly, frightening. What was he thinking? He FINALLY got Conservatives on board w/ Palin. Before that, they were lukewarm at BEST. But instead of letting sleeping dogs lie, he's insisting on challenging the Democrats, and accusing them of derailing the Amnesty bill. It's almost silly. McCain, of all people should know, the Amnesty bill was derailed by Conservatives (like myself) who see illegal immigration for what it is: cheating; both by the people who sneak in and expect anointment, and by the businesses who insist on breaking multiple laws, and maximizing their profits via their waves neo-indentured servants. The McCain camp should not fein surprise if they push this issue, and see their tenuous poll numbers disappear overnight. Seriously, this is simply baffling, and an amazing example of historical political ineptitude.

Posted by: ed | September 15, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Did McCain Violate The Logan Act AND the Hatch Act?!?

John McCain took a trip to south america—billed as official Congressional travel--with his two colleagues Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. It’s been reported that prior to the trip, John McCain spoke to Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at around 4pm and Uribe gave him some highlights of the operation to spring the hostages. When the Senators had dinner with Uribe that night, they were briefed on the operation but none revealed it because they said it was “classified.”

When McCain was asked about the operation once the hostages were freed, he revealed the fact that he’d been briefed, and praised the operation.

Here’s the problem, there’s a law known as the Logan Act that 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, 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."

The conversation with Uribe definitely qualifies as "correspondence or intercourse" and we have a "controversy" with the Colombian government because the United States has been on their back for years to get these hostages freed. To be sure, the trip itself was cleared by the US government, but that's different from State expressly allowing McCain to have a direct "classified” conversation with President Uribe about an ongoing controversy. If McCain was going to have private conversations with a foreign leader, the conversation itself would have to be cleared.

John McCain’s conversation with Uribe raises some serious questions that make more investigation necessary. Namely:

Was John McCain’s conversation with Uribe classified?
Did McCain have prior approval for this conversation?
Did McCain’s staff (or that of Liebermann’s or Graham’s) clear the content of the conversation with Uribe through the State Department?
Once McCain knew this information, did he—in good faith—make that information known to the State Department?
When asked about it, McCain’s aide reportedly said:

"I don't think that there is an established protocol" for such briefings, said a McCain aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. " 'Protocol' is not a word I would associate with this."

Perhaps there isn’t protocol, but there are laws. And for someone who wants to have the top job of enforcing them, voters deserve to know the due diligence he did on this trip to ensure that he upheld the same laws that govern our diplomats.

Questions are also circulating about McCain’s recent trip to Canada . It too was billed as not being political but rather Senatorial. Therefore, he needs to act like a senator, and not as a presidential candidate. This is because according to the Hatch Act, US government resources and personnel cannot be used in support of political purposes. As the principal on the trip, McCain would have to adhere to these rules, and save the conversation about his campaign for his own plane, at his own events, and not those done on the taxpayer dime. However, in his remarks while in Canada, McCain repeatedly referred to his presidential campaign including in the trip’s headline speech.

WHAT A REPUBLICAN CRIMINAL!

Posted by: The ONLY Scott in the WORLD! | September 15, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

I am not voting for either of these two idiots. Ill be writing in Huckabee. I have a neihbor who will be writing in Hillary. I have sent off for a 2012 Huckabee sign., That is the sign I will have in my yard this election., I told my neihbor and he said he will get a Hillary 2012 Sign. LOL The funny thing is, There are no Obama or McCain signs on my street. In Ohio, We dont really like either of these Candidates. Feel Like We Do You can Go to Skip08 and order your candidates 2012 election sign, put it up for protest. http://www.skip08.com

I am not going to settle this year. I will write in a much more qualified candidate.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous- Once again you demonstrate for the readers of the Washington post your 2nd grade, probably underemployed intellect by posting your McCain/Hatch Act post in MY name, because you're ashamed to use your own. You're as shameful as the Naked Emperor who went to Iraq to PROLONG the war!

_____________________________

National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Scott,
So glad you know how to cut and paste.
Now cut and paste something worthwhile and truthful. You can start with Obama and his Chicago style politics.

Posted by: NO Experience Necessary | September 15, 2008
***********
Be my guest- I think Obama's negotiations to EXTEND the war in Iraq is the worst thing I've read about either candidate this year!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

Scott,
So glad you know how to cut and paste.
Now cut and paste something worthwhile and truthful. You can start with Obama and his Chicago style politics.

Posted by: NO Experience Necessary | September 15, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Did McCain Violate The Logan Act AND the Hatch Act?!?

John McCain took a trip to south america—billed as official Congressional travel--with his two colleagues Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. It’s been reported that prior to the trip, John McCain spoke to Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at around 4pm and Uribe gave him some highlights of the operation to spring the hostages. When the Senators had dinner with Uribe that night, they were briefed on the operation but none revealed it because they said it was “classified.”

When McCain was asked about the operation once the hostages were freed, he revealed the fact that he’d been briefed, and praised the operation.

Here’s the problem, there’s a law known as the Logan Act that 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, 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."

The conversation with Uribe definitely qualifies as "correspondence or intercourse" and we have a "controversy" with the Colombian government because the United States has been on their back for years to get these hostages freed. To be sure, the trip itself was cleared by the US government, but that's different from State expressly allowing McCain to have a direct "classified” conversation with President Uribe about an ongoing controversy. If McCain was going to have private conversations with a foreign leader, the conversation itself would have to be cleared.

John McCain’s conversation with Uribe raises some serious questions that make more investigation necessary. Namely:

Was John McCain’s conversation with Uribe classified?
Did McCain have prior approval for this conversation?
Did McCain’s staff (or that of Liebermann’s or Graham’s) clear the content of the conversation with Uribe through the State Department?
Once McCain knew this information, did he—in good faith—make that information known to the State Department?
When asked about it, McCain’s aide reportedly said:

"I don't think that there is an established protocol" for such briefings, said a McCain aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. " 'Protocol' is not a word I would associate with this."

Perhaps there isn’t protocol, but there are laws. And for someone who wants to have the top job of enforcing them, voters deserve to know the due diligence he did on this trip to ensure that he upheld the same laws that govern our diplomats.

Questions are also circulating about McCain’s recent trip to Canada . It too was billed as not being political but rather Senatorial. Therefore, he needs to act like a senator, and not as a presidential candidate. This is because according to the Hatch Act, US government resources and personnel cannot be used in support of political purposes. As the principal on the trip, McCain would have to adhere to these rules, and save the conversation about his campaign for his own plane, at his own events, and not those done on the taxpayer dime. However, in his remarks while in Canada, McCain repeatedly referred to his presidential campaign including in the trip’s headline speech.

WHAT A REPUBLICAN CRIMINAL!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

The GOP can lie in two languages!

Where are you on immigration Johnnie?

Tell your right wing nuts what you're saying in Spanish - and its not quite what you're saying in English.

When your mouth is open and talking, you're lying.

Posted by: toritto | September 15, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

At one time or other John McCain has been for or against everything. He was against torture until it came time to vote against it when without fanfare he supported the Bush administration.

A man who stands for everything stands for nothing. That is something John McCain will agree with at some time or other.

Posted by: Delmar | September 15, 2008 6:41 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous- forgetting the fact that my post came from the National Review and was posted in my name, while your's came from who knows where (Huff post or dailykos probably) probably the same place the Down's Sydrome lie came from.....AND WAS ALSO POSTED IN MY NAME-
DO YOU REALLY WANT TO COMPARE KEEPING OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ AN EXTRA DAY-
WHICH OBAMA WANTED- WITH SECRET NEGOTIATIONS WITH COLUMBIA OVER WHAT??? TRADE???? OOOOOOHHH!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

Scott is a one issue voter: The Logan Act!

LOL - too funny!

Posted by: Sally | September 15, 2008 5:54 PM
*************
No Sally- Hypocrisy-
Claiming McCain wanted a 100 year war, Obama went to Iraq and negotiated a DELAYED exit for our troops!
How can that Not bother you Sally?

And Corn Ethanol...

And the his opposition to the Infant Protection Act...

And Tony Rezko....

And Bill Ayres...


*********
National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Did McCain Violate The Logan Act AND the Hatch Act?!?

John McCain took a trip to south america—billed as official Congressional travel--with his two colleagues Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. It’s been reported that prior to the trip, John McCain spoke to Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at around 4pm and Uribe gave him some highlights of the operation to spring the hostages. When the Senators had dinner with Uribe that night, they were briefed on the operation but none revealed it because they said it was “classified.”

When McCain was asked about the operation once the hostages were freed, he revealed the fact that he’d been briefed, and praised the operation.

Here’s the problem, there’s a law known as the Logan Act that 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, 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."

The conversation with Uribe definitely qualifies as "correspondence or intercourse" and we have a "controversy" with the Colombian government because the United States has been on their back for years to get these hostages freed. To be sure, the trip itself was cleared by the US government, but that's different from State expressly allowing McCain to have a direct "classified” conversation with President Uribe about an ongoing controversy. If McCain was going to have private conversations with a foreign leader, the conversation itself would have to be cleared.

John McCain’s conversation with Uribe raises some serious questions that make more investigation necessary. Namely:

Was John McCain’s conversation with Uribe classified?
Did McCain have prior approval for this conversation?
Did McCain’s staff (or that of Liebermann’s or Graham’s) clear the content of the conversation with Uribe through the State Department?
Once McCain knew this information, did he—in good faith—make that information known to the State Department?
When asked about it, McCain’s aide reportedly said:

"I don't think that there is an established protocol" for such briefings, said a McCain aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. " 'Protocol' is not a word I would associate with this."

Perhaps there isn’t protocol, but there are laws. And for someone who wants to have the top job of enforcing them, voters deserve to know the due diligence he did on this trip to ensure that he upheld the same laws that govern our diplomats.

Questions are also circulating about McCain’s recent trip to Canada . It too was billed as not being political but rather Senatorial. Therefore, he needs to act like a senator, and not as a presidential candidate. This is because according to the Hatch Act, US government resources and personnel cannot be used in support of political purposes. As the principal on the trip, McCain would have to adhere to these rules, and save the conversation about his campaign for his own plane, at his own events, and not those done on the taxpayer dime. However, in his remarks while in Canada, McCain repeatedly referred to his presidential campaign including in the trip’s headline speech.

WHAT A REPUBLICAN CRIMINAL!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

The Truth from the Iraqi Foreign Minister

National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA WENT TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

i wish the polotitions would read this i doubt they do lol

Posted by: yona loriner | September 15, 2008 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Did McCain Violate The Logan Act AND the Hatch Act?!?

John McCain took a trip to south america—billed as official Congressional travel--with his two colleagues Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham. It’s been reported that prior to the trip, John McCain spoke to Colombian President Alvaro Uribe at around 4pm and Uribe gave him some highlights of the operation to spring the hostages. When the Senators had dinner with Uribe that night, they were briefed on the operation but none revealed it because they said it was “classified.”

When McCain was asked about the operation once the hostages were freed, he revealed the fact that he’d been briefed, and praised the operation.

Here’s the problem, there’s a law known as the Logan Act that 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, 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."

The conversation with Uribe definitely qualifies as "correspondence or intercourse" and we have a "controversy" with the Colombian government because the United States has been on their back for years to get these hostages freed. To be sure, the trip itself was cleared by the US government, but that's different from State expressly allowing McCain to have a direct "classified” conversation with President Uribe about an ongoing controversy. If McCain was going to have private conversations with a foreign leader, the conversation itself would have to be cleared.

John McCain’s conversation with Uribe raises some serious questions that make more investigation necessary. Namely:

Was John McCain’s conversation with Uribe classified?
Did McCain have prior approval for this conversation?
Did McCain’s staff (or that of Liebermann’s or Graham’s) clear the content of the conversation with Uribe through the State Department?
Once McCain knew this information, did he—in good faith—make that information known to the State Department?
When asked about it, McCain’s aide reportedly said:

"I don't think that there is an established protocol" for such briefings, said a McCain aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity. " 'Protocol' is not a word I would associate with this."

Perhaps there isn’t protocol, but there are laws. And for someone who wants to have the top job of enforcing them, voters deserve to know the due diligence he did on this trip to ensure that he upheld the same laws that govern our diplomats.

Questions are also circulating about McCain’s recent trip to Canada . It too was billed as not being political but rather Senatorial. Therefore, he needs to act like a senator, and not as a presidential candidate. This is because according to the Hatch Act, US government resources and personnel cannot be used in support of political purposes. As the principal on the trip, McCain would have to adhere to these rules, and save the conversation about his campaign for his own plane, at his own events, and not those done on the taxpayer dime. However, in his remarks while in Canada, McCain repeatedly referred to his presidential campaign including in the trip’s headline speech.

WHAT A REPUBLICAN CRIMINAL!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

In recent weeks, John McCain and the Republican Party have blatantly and without any shame adopted the Democratic campaign theme of “change”. It should be evident to an objective observer that Bush 43 and now McCain and Pailin are mere puppets to the true Republican national party leaders who control their strings. Cheney is one of the few of that inner cabal that have been calling the shots since the Nixon administration. They are in fact a continuation of the Nixon and Ford presidencies with only a disruption during the Carter and Clinton years. Bush 41( Head of the RNC during Nixon, former head of the CIA,VP to Reagan, and president is probably the real leader of this political Cosa Nostra if not a equal partner of this power sharing musical chairs game. His right and left hands have been Dick Cheney(former Sec.of Defense of Bush 41, former White House Chief of staff for Ford) and the other is Donald Rumsfeld(former Sec. of Defense for Ford and Bush 43,former special envoy to the Middle East during Reagan). Another member of this group, more likely a captain if not a full blown boss himself is James Baker (former C.O.S of Reagan, former Under Sec. of Commerce for Ford, former C.O.S and Sec of State for Bush 41, former Sec. of Treasury for Reagan, former chief legal advisor to Bush 43). Another captain or free lance enforcer is Karl Rove a college drop out and campaign manager for both Bush 41 and 43, also for Phil Gram who is McCain’s economic advisor.
Lets look at McCain’s staff of change.
On July 2, 2008, Steve Schmidt was given "full operational control" of McCain's campaign. Steve Schmidt prior to this was a top aide to Dick Cheney and a protégé to Karl Rove. Another advisor is Charles R. Black worked for Ronald Reagan's two Presidential campaigns in 1976 and 1980 and he was a senior political adviser to the 1992 re-election campaign of George H.W. Bush. Another advisor is Randy Scheunemann. He was project director for the Project for the New American Century. A neo-conservative think tank founded by non other than Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Bill Kristol and others in 1996. Other signatories to this group reads like a who’s who of the last 8 years of the republican administration.
These people have never cared about small town america or “values” All they care about is war profiteering. Many of the signatories have never served in the military. Cheney and Rove both dodged the draft. Look at the statement of principles by the PNAC. Rumsfeld was a good friend of Saddam Huessin in the 80’s Cheney didn’t want Nelson Mandela free. These are the real puppet masters, they throw out the talking points about the left of being elitist and not caring about middle america and these same guys other than Rove have advanced degrees and are worth no less than 10 million dollars. People who support them need to extricate their heads out of Limbaugh and Hannity’s asses and see what is really happening to them. McCain is not his own man he confuses stories of his real life with a book he read “The Gulag Archipelago", in which a fellow prisoner - not a guard - silently drew a cross in the dirt with a stick.” An ironic twist to all this is Eliot A. Cohen, a signatory to the PNAC "Statement of Principles", responded in The Washington Post: "There is no evidence that generals as a class make wiser national security policymakers than civilians. George C. Marshall, our greatest soldier statesman after George Washington, opposed shipping arms to Britain in 1940. His boss, Franklin D. Roosevelt, with nary a day in uniform, thought otherwise. Whose judgment looks better?"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/johnmccain/2581086/John-McCain-accused-of-plagiarising-Wikipedia-for-speeches.html. Even if you don’t like Obama there is no-way a sane person can want this continued blatant fleecing of our Nation.
Thes are all verifiable facts and can be found just with a google search. AIPAC and PNAC are the military industrial complex.
Other than the ultra affluent, how can anyone support the Republican Party? When will small town America realize that they are being duped into supporting the ultra-affluent agenda? The talking points of the right are so hypocritical that it becomes laughable. The red meat of the right is the so called Main stream Media as if Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. are not part of it. They demean celebrity status, however they tout one of their greatest presidents(Reagan) was an actor. They say they are the party of patriotism, yet many of the upper echelon of the party have never served, i.e. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Baker, Reagan. They say that they care about "Main Street" USA but only bail out the Whales of Wall Street. Yet small town America eat this tripe every year. They don't care about religion unless it can be used to stir up the base, nor science or technology unless there is a buck to be made. Small town America takes pride on its freedom but yet don't realize that over time we are becoming less free, ie wire tapping and other forms of domestic surveillance. They demean people of intelligence because they know many people of small town America don't have degrees and use it at a fake issue and call people who spent time in academia as elitist when many on the right serve on university boards and have part-time professorships. They say they are against affirmitive action but yet celebrate mediocrity, Bush43 and McCain graduating at the bottom of their classes. Who both came from already well established families and had all the opportunities and connections to excel. Why does small town America believes this is the party for them? Christian conservatives seem to the be the first ones who want to go to war and bomb someone before any diplomacy is tried. Why can't small town America and Christian conservatives realize they are being used as pawns just as much the Islamic fundamentalist are. Islamic fundamentalist come from small town Middle East and given the same kind of talking points as the evangelicals. They want prayer in school, no choice available to women, and believe to the core that their ideas about worship and country are the best. Wake up small town America you are being duped.Talking about who is more patriotic, symbols, lipstick and wearing pins are nothing more than distractions to the real issue of how a few select group of people have held power almost continuously for over 30 years. Yes the left has their own political power groups but none have been so effective at pushing forward an agenda that is fundamentally bad for the U.S. and in a larger view the entire world. I stress again the now defunct PNAC and the AIPAC have been slowly pushing us closer to another World War. Bush41 and et al have been doing this and no one calls them on it. Every Republican administration has basically the same people recycled since Nixon. Just do a little research and you will see that these people are just pushing this agenda of some kind of Pax Americana and not taking into account that maybe other nations of the world might not like that and if not bomb them.Many people who support the Republican party, really need to read "1984" by George Orwell and see how we as nation have been inching closer to that type of society. People think this story is about a communist society, but it is more about how a society is kept in a constant state of fear in order for the ruling class to stay in control. Doublespeak, patriotism to the point of frenzy, censorship, erosion of civil liberties (not respecting the Constitution) is happening right in front of us. The consolidation of government (the executive branch has never been more powerful than ever, gridlocked legislature with only two parties for representation, a judiciary that just kowtows to the executive branch). No real independent journalism. Cameras placed on every street corner. This may sound like delusional conspiracy stuff, but I implore people to research for themselves to really see what is happening to them. People think this could never happen here in the U.S. but all this has already happening, slowly, incrementally all under the guise of "keeping America safe

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

National Review

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

In a twisted sort of way I almost hope that McCain does win this election because four more years of Bush/McCain failed policies would for all intents and purposes end the Republican Party as we know it today. They would become the 4th party gadflies that they deserve to be.

For all of you idiots in economic downtrodden states like Ohio, Pa and Michigan, you'll deserve what you get if you are actually stupid enough to vote for John McBush and Caribou Barbie..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnb2IrsU1Cg

Posted by: ex-Republican | September 15, 2008 5:16 PM | Report abuse

I am not voting for either of these two idiots. Ill be writing in Huckabee. I have a neihbor who will be writing in Hillary. I have sent off for a 2012 Huckabee sign., That is the sign I will have in my yard this election., I told my neihbor and he said he will get a Hillary 2012 Sign. LOL The funny thing is, There are no Obama or McCain signs on my street. In Ohio, We dont really like either of these Candidates. Feel Like We Do You can Go to Skip08 and order your candidates 2012 election sign, put it up for protest. http://www.skip08.com

I am not going to settle this year. I will write in a much more qualified candidate.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

It's clear. McCain will continue to outright lie in his ads, as long as it improves his chances at winning.

McCain's camp has made it clear, they're taking their message directly to the voters and aren't concerned about the media "filter" as they describe it.

IOW if flat out lying works and voters award McCain the WH based on outright falsehoods, so what, scoreboard.

Now there's a basis for uniting the country LOL.

Posted by: MA | September 15, 2008 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Monday, September 15, 2008


Did Obama Violate The Logan Act? [Jonah Goldberg]


Amir Taheri:

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."

"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 says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is "illegal," he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the "weakened Bush administration," Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a "realistic withdrawal date." They declined.
____

In 1975, Senators John Sparkman and George McGovern were accused of violating the Logan Act when they traveled to Cuba and met with officials there. In considering that case, the U.S. Department of State concluded:

The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution. In the case of Senators McGovern and Sparkman the executive branch, although it did not in any way encourage the Senators to go to Cuba , was fully informed of the nature and purpose of their visit, and had validated their passports for travel to that country. Senator McGovern’s report of his discussions with Cuban officials states: "I made it clear that I had no authority to negotiate on behalf of the United States — that I had come to listen and learn...." (Cuban Realities: May 1975, 94th Cong., 1st Sess., August 1975).

OBAMA CAME TO NEGOTIATE A POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT DELAY IN THE WITHDRAWL OF OUR TROOPS- WAS HE AFRAID THE "100 YEARS WAR" CLAIM WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE JOKE IT ALWAYS WAS?

WHAT A HYPOCRITE !!!

WELL AT LEAST HE'LL HAVE ONE MORE THING IN COMMON WITH MCGOVERN AFTER NOVEMBER!

Posted by: Scott | September 15, 2008 4:35 PM | Report abuse

If we do not vote for obama,
we are racist's, I like
the washingtonPost subliminal
message. Dr.King said, 'judged
on the content of his character'
It is time the media drops it's
preoccupation with gender and
race, and starts seeing us
as americans!
Vote for the candidate with the character
to face the challenges we may face.
and God be With Us'

Posted by: usa3 | September 15, 2008 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Isn't this the bill that McCain voted against, his own bill?, or was that something else?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 15, 2008 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Civility is a principled behavior that should always be strived for; however, the people that would elect McCain after seeing the damage that bush and the republicans have done to this nation; the people who refuse to educate themselves on McCain's career of talking honorably while acting dishonorably time and time again; the people who would vote for an ignorant, arrogant person like Palin, after seeing what disasters have been inflicted by the ignorant, arrogant bush--these are people that inspire righteous anger rather than a benign, tolerant forbearance and yet more futile attempts to make them see the light.


Those who can overlook the hellishness that these "bushie" (now McCain) supporters have enabled over the last 8 years, and who can keep attempting to continue to have civil discourse with the close-minded are to be commended. As for me, I cannot.

Posted by: McCain = Bush's third term | September 15, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

For once, the WaPo is right! BHO is indeed a very strong advocate of "immigrants". So strong that he was not just the only Senator to attend a march, but the march he spoke at had been organized by possible proxies of the MexicanGovernment:

http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/007808.html

Or, we could print up fliers showing BHO congratulating an open borders loon who used to serve on a panel advising the MexicanGovernment:

http://24ahead.com/blog/archives/007821.html

While McCain is "great" on this issue, BHO is even "better"!

Posted by: 24AheadDotCom | September 15, 2008 4:12 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company