Growing List of Congressmen Boycotting Netanyahu Address

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok

This entire thread is a straw man since congress has invited people to speak there for centuries.

but hey who cares right ?

Clearly not you - the issue isn't Congress inviting someone to speak - you have cherry picked that.

The issue is Congress inviting someone to speak without consulting the administration.

Why does Congress have to ask the "Administration"

We are supposed to have a system of checks and balances, that's what keeps the "administration"under control ( and I think it's time for Bibi to go don't get me wrong Israel needs a new leader)

It's the Job of our other branches to prevent the "opinion" of a President from running amok unchecked, they can hear from whomever the frack they want.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: crazyewok

No they do not.

They took an oath of affirmation.

“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God” (5 U.S.C. §3331).

clerk.house.gov...

Boycotting is putting their golden boy above the constitution of the United States, and protecting it from ALL enemies both FOREIGN, and domestic.

WITHOUT any mental reservation or purpose of EVASION.

The LEFT is purposely evading their duty as elected officials of this country.

Not out of doing the right thing, but because of petty politics.

Maybe you should get someone to explain that to you at a level you can understand. Nowhere in that does it say the they have to sit and listen to some foreigner speak to congress. Also what enemy? Iran hasn't attacked America and Benny said his sole reason for speaking to congress was to disrupt our peace talks with Iran and to get increased sanctions against Iran. If anything they should be looking into filing charges against Boehner for violating the Logan act.

Does it bother anyone that our congress is entertaining the attendance of a leader of a country...


That has more spies in our jails than any other country in the world?

And, has people actively spying in our country as we speak?

a reply to: theantediluvian
Now they should follow suit with AIPAC. That Arrogant, War Pig, Lying, Land Stealing Bastard shouldn't be allowed in the Country.

originally posted by: neo96

A reasonable argument can be made that not only are Boehner's political shenanigans in extremely poor form, they're down right unconstitutional.

No it can't.

The only political shenanigans are those crying about Nentanyahu speaking.

Unconstitutional eh?

Then how do people explain this:

Congress has invited speeches by dignitaries throughout its history

history.house.gov...

Read the list of people who have addressed congress.

I always love Israel threads cause they expose the Isrealiphobes.

And have done so through the administration of the time.

a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

The issue is Congress inviting someone to speak without consulting the administration.

One last time.

THEY DO NOT HAVE TO.

Congress has their own separate power.

As in that separation of powers.

Dunno why people are ignoring this.

a reply to: buster2010

Maybe this needs to be explained in a language Netanyahu haters can understand.

The most recent foreign leader to appear before Congress was President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, who spoke on September 18, 2014

conginst.org...

Back to FAKE outrage.

originally posted by: ugmold
a reply to: theantediluvian
Now they should follow suit with AIPAC. That Arrogant, War Pig, Lying, Land Stealing Bastard shouldn't be allowed in the Country.

Actually there are several Pro Israel organizations here in the states that are against Benny speaking to Congress. Benny is only coming here to get what he wants and that is face time for the elections back in Israel (the elections are in two weeks) break up the peace talks and get increased sanctions and to of course cry about the holocaust.

a reply to: neo96

You should really update your sources. The current list is 14 (according to Fox News' count) as of yesterday and the speech isn't scheduled until March 3rd. What's apparent to me is that whatever the issue, you're going to be on the side of John Boehner and the GOP leadership.

As for the bit about the Pope. Apples and oranges. You seem to be having some trouble with nuance. The Pope has nothing to do with ongoing negotiations or US foreign policy and while I don't agree with Boehner's actions in that case either, this is clearly a different circumstance altogether.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: buster2010

Maybe this needs to be explained in a language Netanyahu haters can understand.

The most recent foreign leader to appear before Congress was President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, who spoke on September 18, 2014

conginst.org...

Back to FAKE outrage.

You really have a problem with English don't you? I said they are not bound to listen to a foreign leader speak to congress. So it doesn't matter who has spoken to congress in the past if they don't want to listen to him they don't have to. Now do you understand that?

If this is unconstitutional, why isn't the Justice Department suing?

a reply to: buster2010

Then WHY THE hell have they been doing it for centuries ?

Yeah some people sure do have problems with english.

They also have problems understanding how our government is set up.

originally posted by: xuenchen
If this is unconstitutional, why isn't the Justice Department suing?

Because it isn't.

After 6 years now they suddenly give a damn about that GD piece of paper.

a reply to: theantediluvian

The executive branch does not have absolute authority when it comes to foreign policy decisions.

Only a tyrant would think such, and that is specifically why power was SEPARATED.

Geezus.

a reply to: neo96

Maybe this needs to be explained in a language Netanyahu haters can understand.

Except the State Department was involved in the Poroshenko appearance and it was in-line with the foreign policy positions of the President, the only one who has Constitutional authorization to conduct foreign affairs and to appoint others to do so.

Back to FAKE outrage.

I guess the only outrage that's real is that which you approve of?

No one is forced to attend and listen to the guy speak. Congress has the right to invite anyone they want to give a speech. Bottom line is Boehner invited Benny because Johnny-boy knew it would p!ssoff Obama.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Aloysius the Gaul

The issue is Congress inviting someone to speak without consulting the administration.

One last time.

THEY DO NOT HAVE TO.

Congress has their own separate power.

As in that separation of powers.

Dunno why people are ignoring this.

Did you ever stop to think the reason why people are ignoring is because they know the law better than you do? Boehner inviting Benny here to try to disrupt the peace talks between America and Iran is a clear violation of the Logan act. Here is the text of that act for you.
Logan Act

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.

Boehner is clearly violating this act because he does not have the authority to disrupt the peace talks between America and Iran because that isn't his job.

a reply to: buster2010

Apparently THEY DON"T.

Separation of powers, therefore, refers to the division of government responsibilities into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core functions of another. The intent is to prevent the concentration of power and provide for checks and balances.

Checks and balances.

The legislative branch is responsible for enacting the laws of the state and appropriating the money necessary to operate the government.

It is congress's job to write legislation.

* The executive branch is responsible for implementing and administering the public policy enacted and funded by the legislative branch.

Its the Potus' job to faithfully execute those pieces of legislation.

Not just tell congress to write the hell whatever he wants.

www.ncsl.org...

It is damn right astounding that some people just don't get that.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian

The executive branch does not have absolute authority when it comes to foreign policy decisions.

Only a tyrant would think such, and that is specifically why power was SEPARATED.

Geezus.

That's not what I said and if you weren't blinded by partisanship, you'd see that Congress directly conducting affairs with foreign leaders is a violation of these separations. Just like with the appointment of ambassadors and the signing of treaties, the Executive branch initiates and Congress (in those cases, Senate) approves appointments and ratifies treaties.

So is King Boehner the Usurper holding his own court now?