Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Legal implications, re: Taheri's Obama story

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTQ4OTAyODkzNGQ3MTM1YzZjYWJmZWYxMTZmZTM5MmY=

Amy Holmes comments on Amir Taheri account of Obama’s recent actions in Iraq:

“What does the Constitution have to say about such an act? My understanding is that the International Commerce Acts of 1798 prohibits any private citizen or party from negotiating with a foreign power in matters of national policy or military action. (H/T Google.) Has this prohibition lost its power in modern politics (e.g. Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson's freelance diplomatic efforts.) Is there any precedence for a presidential candidate to attempt to undermine a Commander in Chief and manipulate war time negotiations with a foreign power for his own electoral advantage?”

Still no report from the Iraqi Foreign Minister denying Taheri’s account.

Lawrence Helm

2 comments:

DN said...

Confirmation from Obama speaker:
"...Obama had told the Iraqis that they should not rush through a "Strategic Framework Agreement" governing the future of US forces until after President George W. Bush leaves office..."

The relevant law is the Logan's law
(3 years in prison or fine) according to wiki

Lawrence Helm said...

DN,

Thanks, I was learning about the legal implications in increments. See subsequent postings. Also, in my latest, posted early this morning, I send a letter to the Attorney General asking if anything is going to be done.

Lawrence Helm