[lit-ideas] Re: Should Obama be prosecuted under Logan Act?

  • From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:34:10 -0700


Andy McCarthy said that if we, (it would have to be the Attorney General I suppose), charged Obama with a violation of the Logan Act, we would be like a Banana Republic, conducting our political campaigns in the court. But is that true? Why did we create the Logan Act if we didn’t intend to enforce it?

What are the extenuating circumstances that would convince the Attorney General not to charge Obama with a violation of the Logan Act? I don’t know. Do nominees get a free ride? Do they have diplomatic immunity? We’ll see.

[I’ll do a quick Google-check before posting this, to see if any of the “reputable” news agencies have picked this story up yet – or if there are any smoking-gun denials – or if Taheri has been arrested by the Obama police for making the whole thing up . . . nope.]

Save you the trouble, mate. (From wiki, but there's lots more.)

The Logan Act is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years.

The text of the Act is broad and is addressed at any attempt of a US citizen to conduct foreign relations without authority. However, there is no record of any convictions or even prosecutions under the Logan Act.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act

Robert Paul

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: