Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

How Jim Demint managed to go to Honduras

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Are_grits_groceries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:41 PM
Original message
How Jim Demint managed to go to Honduras
Jim DeMint is going down to "meddle" in the situation and to encourage the coup leaders to stand strong against the White House and the US Department of State.

Senator DeMint has behaved from the beginning as if he has a dog in the race down in Honduras, and it is not the one that the US government feels comfortable supporting at the moment. None of Honduras' neighbors do either.

It is extremely rare that a Chairman of a Committee on which a US Senator works would move to block a resource allocation that would allow that Member to fly somewhere within the jurisdiction of that Committee -- but Senator John Kerry blocked DeMint's plans to go and commiserate with wealthy businessmen who had recently had visas revoked by the US government and to encourage them to stand strong against the US government.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell intervened and arranged a Department of Defense secured plane to take the Senator and several House Members to Honduras -- thus reversing John Kerry's action.

I am currently looking into how exactly Senator McConnell secured agreement from the Department of Defense, part of the Obama-controlled Executive Branch, to provide the plane.

Senator John Kerry's rationale for rejecting Jim DeMint's request for resources for the Honduras trip was that DeMint has blocked consideration of two key Obama Latin America foreign policy appointments.
<snip>
DeMint seems to be focused on undermining US government policy by commiserating with foreign nationals abroad.

I respect Senator DeMint's right to speak his mind and conscience from the floor of the Senate, on his blog, on twitter, wherever he likes -- but there is something extremely wrong about a US Senator conspiring with government officials of another nation as well as wealthy supporters of a coup against the applied policies of the United States.

Jim DeMint made the decision to go to Honduras just as de facto Honduran president Roberto Micheletti began to issue signals that he was willing to work out an arrangement on the ousted President and to negotiate something with the United States and other regional stakeholders.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com /

I want somebody to jack up DeMint. I also was to know why and who authorized a DOD plane to take them to Honduras.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. can anyone explain to me why this isn't Sedition?
you not only in wishing that he gets jacked up..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
williesgirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
2. And our tax dollars are paying for him to get there? How can that happen? The Secy of Defense has
some serious questions to answer to the American people and fucking NOW. rec'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:50 PM
Response to Original message
3. Whoever flew that plane needs to be demoted
If not court-martialed. And disciplinary action needs to go all the way up the chain of command until the Chirman of the Joint Chiefs, says "yes, sir Mr. President, will do".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. Why? If they were handed legitimate orders for the flight?
Orders can be disregarded for only a few specific reasons. I don't where those exceptions would apply here. Whomever authorized them might be a better place to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Disregarded?
They should be questioned, given the publicity on the issue. Start with the pilot's CO and work up the chain of command. I'll bet there are some Gen. Boykin type whackos who need to be reined in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. You really are pretty clueless about how the military thing works
amd really need to read up on it.

There is a well defined process for legislators to request DoD transportation. If its followed, they fly. It can be overridden but was not in this case. Why is a good question to ask the civilians in the process. Would you rather the military question legitimate directions from civilians in government based on what is in the media?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
27. No the fault, blame, and responsibility go up the food chain not on a pilot
Why would you put this on a relative grunt when this is really a civilian authority question? Starting with my scumbag Senator and off to State and Defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lagomorph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #3
29. The pilot's job is to fly the plane....
...when given legal orders, his job is to say "yes, sir, Senator, will do."

You might want to save the torches and pitchforks for those who give the orders, rather than those who are required to take an oath to follow them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
4. It really is seditious.
Who's in charge down there in DC, anyway?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lagomorph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
30. Congress can go where it pleases and talk to whomever they choose...
This has been going on for decades...

Democrats went to Baghdad and voiced support for Saddam before the conflict.

Good or bad, it's just more of the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HipChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. the Logan Act
Edited on Sat Oct-03-09 02:54 PM by HipChick
So taxpayers paid for this trip? Why is a member or members of the republican party going to another country to promote policies counter to American foreign policy? He needs to be fined,imprisoned or both..



The senator is probably aware of the Logan Act, passed in 1799.

� 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

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, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of 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.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thunder rising Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. The Logan Act may have to come into play;
www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl33265.pdf

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.
---snip--
In 1994 the fine was changed from $5,000 to under this title.2 Otherwise, there do
not appear to have been any substantial changes in the Act since its original
enactment on January 30, 1799, as 1 Stat. 613.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harkadog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
31. The Logan Act has never been enforced
It is unconstitutional and prosecutors have known that for over two hundred years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. He was going no matter what. Round trip air from DC is only $561.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. Why do you even post here?
Everything you post is either nonsense or it supports a "do nothing" stance - I just don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. It's called astroturf.
Too bad it flies under the radar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
8. why do republicans still control what goes on in congress? somebody please fucking tell me
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmeraldCityGrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. It's beginning to seem that way...isn't it?
Why is McChrystal leaking memos and giving interviews on sensitive military strategies? Why are Beck and Limbaugh being quoted in the media on every time they fart?

Why are the skeletal remains of the Repub party being treated as an equal power in a government they corrupted and lost by an overwhelming majority?

Also, maybe it's time for Gates to go. He was Bush appointee. I never felt comfortable with Obama allowing him to stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Are you folks aware that McChrystal was summoned to Copenhagen
for a 30-minute conversation with his President on AF1 yesterday?

(My reference is (in Spanish) here: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Obama/llam... )


(EFE)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmeraldCityGrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #19
32. No. How interesting.
Can you give a general translation? Thank you for posting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #32
33. Yes. The meat of it is here (first two paragraphs - rough vernacular translation):
Barack Obama conducted an unexpected interview in Copenhagen with the military chief in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, which was intended as a show of authority on the part of the President in a time of uncertainty surrounding the strategy to follow in that conflict. McChrystal, who was in London to address a conference, was summoned to the Danish capital, where Obama was spending barely four hours to promote Chicago's olympic candidacy. The two men conversed during around half an hour aboard Air Force One.

With this interview, formally designated as discussing certain aspects of the conflict in Afghanistan, the White House seeks at the same time to answer critics who have been calling out the slight attention it has been paying to McChrystal and to deliver, discretely, a call to order to the General, who in recent weeks has persistently been making statements which have become embarrassing to the President.

...


(There follow further paragraphs explaining the background: Afghan situation, McChrystal's appointment and some of what he's recently been saying (more troops, etc), while Obama, it is said, has decided to think about the situation somewhat more deeply).

Are you saying there has been zero US MSM coverage of this "interview"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #32
37. WaPo version here
McChrystal Flown to Denmark To Discuss War With Obama

By Michael D. Shear
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 3, 2009

A brief meeting between President Obama and his top general in Afghanistan on Friday offered the commander in chief an opportunity to question directly the dire assessment of the war effort there, officials said. The previously unannounced meeting between Obama and Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal took place aboard Air Force One after it landed in Copenhagen Friday morning. McChrystal, who had been in London for a speech, was whisked to Denmark at Obama's request, White House aides said.

The relationship between the two men is increasingly under scrutiny as Obama weighs whether to accept McChrystal's recommendations for a major increase in U.S. troops in Afghanistan. National security officials say Obama will decide this month, after a series of top-level briefings that began last week. Until Friday, Obama had talked with McChrystal only from a distance, and had met him only once. Aides called the private meeting "productive" and went out of their way to say how fond Obama is of the man he chose to lead the war.

Obama likes McChrystal "very much personally," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters. He added that Obama "got a chance, as I said earlier, to meet and talk with his wife, somebody who obviously is, along with General McChrystal, making personal sacrifices in this whole endeavor."

McChrystal has spent much of the past two weeks putting enormous pressure on the Obama administration to back his calls for as many as 40,000 additional troops. The general's classified assessment of the war was obtained last month by The Washington Post and has freed him to advocate for it publicly.

More: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. It's a shame 'pukes are still in charge of the DOD and implementing
any part of junior's wet dream. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. Gates should have been out on day 1
Why Obama ever held him over, I can't fathom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #23
36. Dems like Clinton and Obama must have a 'puke Secretary of Defense to show they are
strong on national defense and not soft on communism or terra, else 'pukes might say Dems are soft on communism and terra and weak on national defense, a mortal fear Dems seem to be going to any lengths to try to avoid no matter how absurd, self-defeating, destructive, costly, mis-allocation of funds, and skewing of national priorities. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
9. AFA as invoking Logan, it's most likely not going to happen,
Edited on Sat Oct-03-09 03:12 PM by Gabi Hayes
as has been already discussed here.

McGovern went to Cuba in 1975, and it was urged he be prosecuted then under Logan

The clear intent of this provision is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 , 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.

Digest of United States Practice of International Law, 1975, p. 750

they tried to use it against Pelosi, too, when she went to Syria, or wherever it was. there are other instances, too, which I don't remember, and they called the 'offending' dems traitors at the time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anonymous171 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
10. By allowing this to happen, Obama is showing implicit support for the coup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
timeforpeace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. You are right about that I'm afraid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. he can't legally do anything to stop him, but he should speak out against the
coup and those who support it

has he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malletgirl02 Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
15. Appointments
I didn't know Demint was blocking two Latin American Foreign policy Appointments. Especially it seems that area seems to be growing in importance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
monmouth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
16. Creep needs to have a sit-down with Mrs. Clinton. ...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost Dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
18. A DoD plane? Hell, maybe you really do need to worry about a possible coup
right there in Washington?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wroberts189 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #18
34. Interesting ..who signed the orders? Who authorized the flight? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShadowLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 04:53 PM
Response to Original message
20. Why isn't anyone calling this treason? You know the GOP would be if the situation was reversed.
The GOP would be all over this in the news calling democrats traitors if the situation were reversed, and democrats were undermining US foreign policy by traveling to a foreign country to support a leftist group that overthrew a rightwing ruler who was elected by the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selatius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:38 PM
Response to Original message
24. Maybe Obama has people in his cabinet who is working against him on this...or...
maybe he just didn't want to deal with the political fight of keeping DeMint grounded, so he sent the order on to the DoD to let him fly despite Kerry's attempt to stop him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-03-09 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Obama's administration has been tepid in their support for Zelaya
or of the democratic process in Honduras. They have yet to denounce the murders of activists or opposition politicians, or the torture of journalists or the roundups and illegal detentions or the curfews or the shutting down of the opposition media.

They are still training Hondurans at the School of Assassins.

I'm not at all sure that they've cut off all funding, either. Probably not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shallah Kali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
35. DeMint is in The Family of C Street. I wonder what interests they have in Honduras
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrdmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-04-09 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. This matter in Honduras started under the Bush Administration and Elliott Abrams
This is continuing policies of Bush. Elliott Abrams has a long history of meddling with South America by installing conservative leaders. This goes back to Iran-Contra and perhaps further.

The following is a much known list:

U.S. Marines taking Aristide out of Haiti and flying him to Africa.

The failed CIA overthrow of Chvez of Venezuela.

Election fraud with the help of Choicepoint in Mexico and the election of the conservative Caldern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Jul 12th 2014, 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC