Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Boehner: 'We have a right' to invite Netanyahu to address House [View all]
The Republican House seems to frequently defend doing stupid or insulting things under the banner of their right to do stupid or insulting things if they feel like it. (Cough, government shutdown, cough.) Deciding not to do the stupid or insulting thing because the rest of the nation considers it stupid or insulting doesn't seem to come up as often.
More from DailyKos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/27/1360511/-Boehner-We-have-a-right-to-invite-Netanyahu-to-address-House?detail=email
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
70 replies, 6575 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (3)
ReplyReply to this post
70 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Agreed. It was just a massive breach of protocol and a slap in the face to Obama and long
Fred Sanders
Jan 2015
#27
True, Bibi was hoping to boost his support in Israel's election, which btw, is AGAINST Israel's
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#51
That, apparently, is not the way the Village Beltway mass media sees it, all that matters, isn't it?
Fred Sanders
Jan 2015
#54
But it is how the WH and the five nations involved in helping the President avoid a confrontation
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#57
Not according to the Logan Act, he doesn't. In fact, he should be prosecuted for violating it.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#5
I don't understand your question. Has Senator Sanders negotiated with foreign heads of State or
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#13
If foreign policy is the strict purview of the executive then why does Sen. Sanders get a pass?
Nuclear Unicorn
Jan 2015
#14
So when was there never opposition? You are trying hard to make Sanders look bad and
Rex
Jan 2015
#19
NO ONE's giving Senator Sanders a pass - but he's done NOTHING wrong. You're comparing apples and
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#39
"directly commencing or carrying on any correspondence with a foreign government, or agent thereof"
Nuclear Unicorn
Jan 2015
#40
Republicans *wanted* to charge her with violation of the Logan Act, but they knew it was political
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#44
"Not once...has the Speaker invited a head of a foreign country to speak to the entire Congress"
Nuclear Unicorn
Jan 2015
#63
Heads of state visiting another country are supposed to advise the host country
geek tragedy
Jan 2015
#62
It can consider legislation and spending, but it has no consular or diplomatic authority.
geek tragedy
Jan 2015
#68
How pathetic, the GOP has defenders on DU. However it is not surprising in the least bit.
Rex
Jan 2015
#20
Boehner violated Federal law, specifically the 1799 Logan Act, 18 U.S. Code, subsection 953.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#41
Should Nancy Pelosi have been prosecuted for conducting foreign policy in Syria in 2007?
Nye Bevan
Jan 2015
#43
Has Speaker Pelosi invited Assad to speak to a joint session of Congress in order to influence
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#45
So you'd be OK with Boehner traveling to Israel to meet with Netanyahu there,
Nye Bevan
Jan 2015
#47
Actually the first question was asked by me in post 43, which you have still not answered.
Nye Bevan
Jan 2015
#50
Still grasping at straws, I see. Anyway, asked and answered. Perhaps you need to reread my post
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#56
Well, isn't it common courtesy and an act of mature propriety to answer a question first before
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#55
You're overlooking the fact that I HAVE answered the question, so I HAVE extended courtesy FIRST.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#65