It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Tehran" Tom Cotton was Bribed almost a Million Bucks to Send the Iran Letter

page: 1
33
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+11 more 
posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:54 AM
link   
"Tehran" Tom Cotton was Bribed almost a Million Bucks to Send the Iran Letter


Yep. Tehran Tom got a ton of “contributions” from agents of a foreign power to betray his country. He and the rest of the Teapublican Treason Team all took Israel’s side against America’s, but Tehran Tom the Traitor Tot got paid nearly a million dollars to do so. Perhaps the other Teapubbies got such bribes as well, but we have the goods on Tommie:

Kristol’s Emergency Committee for Israel gave Tom Cotton nearly $1 million in his race for the Senate just five months ago Eli Clifton reported. “Cotton received $960,250 in supportive campaign advertising in the last month.”

Cotton also got $165,000 from Elliott Management Paul Singer’s hedge fund. Singer is the billionaire who is trying to stop Obama’s Iran talks (Clifton’s reporting again).

Notice the pattern, Gentle Reader: money comes in, and a letter goes out. It is bribery, plain and simple.

Perhaps the other 46 Senators who tried to kneecap the Prexy with their illegal letter weren’t likewise bought by agents of a foreign nation, which is scant mitigation for their crimes. Scant but something. Tehran Tom was bought and paid for by another government than ours: and their interests are not the same as ours.


A look at the sources reveal:

Senator who spearheaded letter to Iran got $1 million from Kristol’s ‘Emergency Committee for Israel:’


The U.S. media have been sadly incurious about the origins of yesterday’s unprecedented Open Letter of 47 Republicans to the Iranian leadership seeking to block the president’s likely deal with Iran. The press has portrayed the letter as the work of Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, a 37-year-old freshman senator so new to the limelight that the New York Times got his name wrong on first impression. But as a Times commenter writes, “Does anyone really believe the ‘freshman senator from Arkansas’ wrote the letter? No.”



I don’t know who wrote the letter, but I can tell you whose fingerprints are on it: the only folks who are supporting it publicly, the hard-right Israel lobby. Even as Cotton himself splutters on national television, rightwing lobby groups are the main voices out there defending the letter.

Like Bill Kristol of the Emergency Committee for Israel:
Cotton open letter: “Just so you know, we’re a constitutional democracy. Congress (or next president) has a say.” Dem response: Hysteria.

J Street’s Dylan Williams fingers Bill Kristol for writing the letter: Who gave @SenTomCotton & others the awful idea for the Iran letter? Seems like Sarah Palin-for-VP-level bad advice doesn’t it @BillKristol ?

There’s a reason for Williams’s suspicion. Kristol’s Emergency Committee for Israel gave Tom Cotton nearly $1 million in his race for the Senate just five months ago, Eli Clifton reported. “Cotton received $960,250 in supportive campaign advertising in the last month.” (Thanks to Kay24 in comments).

Cotton also got $165,000 from Elliott Management Paul Singer’s hedge fund. Singer is the billionaire who is trying to stop Obama’s Iran talks (Clifton’s reporting again). He funds the Israel Project too– Josh Block’s efforts.


From Lobelog:

EXCLUSIVE: Emergency Committee for Israel Spends Big on Rep. Cotton


The people who helped lay the groundwork for the war in Iraq have a favorite candidate for today’s midterm election, and that candidate is Rep. Tom Cotton (R) from Arkansas’ 4th congressional district, who is challenging Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) for his Senate seat.

According to newly released FEC filings, Cotton received $960,250 in supportive campaign advertising in the last month from the Emergency Committee for Israel (ECI), a right-wing group headed by the neoconservative pundit, Bill Kristol, who infamously predicted that the Iraq war would last two months. At its inception, the ECI was based out of the same Washington office as the Committee of the Liberation of Iraq, a pressure group that lobbied for the 2003 invasion.

The credibility of Kristol and his neoconservative colleagues was seriously put into question after it was revealed that the war they lobbied for since the time of the Clinton administration failed to turn up weapons of mass destruction.


Bill Kristol is also one of the biggest influences in pushing us into war in Iraq if we recall. It was going to be a "two month war," and we were sure to find "weapons of mass destruction." Lies then as they are lies now. Yet here we are hearing the same lies from the same people trying to goad us into war with Iran.




posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
$o si¢k of big money buying politi¢ian$.

👣



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:59 AM
link   
S&F. This is interesting. I am also hoping that such exposés come about in Canada too for what's happening here too.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I see a lot of words in that piece such as treason, Illegal and even a random Teapublican reference and that's great but um, lets not get too ahead of ourselves before we fact check a couple of things.

1.) Did the letter constitute treason as outlined in the Constitution? Answer: Nope




Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


2.) Was the letter Illegal under the Logan Act? Answer: Nope


Pundits and legal scholars are raising questions over whether Sen. Tom Cotton and the 46 Senate Republicans violated the Logan Act when they penned a letter to Iran's leaders on Monday, undercutting President Barack Obama's efforts to negotiate a nuclear agreement with those same leaders. The law, passed in 1799, forbids any U.S. citizen -- acting without official U.S. authority -- from influencing "disputes or controversies" involving the U.S. and a foreign government.


Source

Senators of the United States are not considered "citizens" and certainly didn't act without official US authority because they are in fact 1/3 of all US authority.

3.) If the OPs source considers this treason, what does he consider operation Fast and Furious, you know.... Something that actually fits the definition of treason?

Now, I'm not saying what they did was right and I'm not saying I'm a fan of all of those Republicans because the large majority of them make me sick but this is hard core political mud slinging at it's worst and what would be a lot better in my opinion is to focus on how completely and shockingly out of control our entire government has become as a whole because it's downright scary and getting worse every day.
edit on 12-3-2015 by Helious because: (no reason given)


+3 more 
posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Helious



Senators of the United States are not considered "citizens" and certainly didn't act without official US authority because they are in fact 1/3 of all US authority.

If they are not US citizens then what are they? You have to be a citizen for at least nine years before being able to be elected into office. Also they did act without official US authority no motion was made in the Senate to vote on this letter. Also your CNN link left out what the law professor fully said when talking about this because he said chances are they did violate the Logan act but people aren't prosecuted for it.

GOP Senators Probably Broke Law With Iran Letter

“They probably were in violation of the act, yes,” says Stephen Vladeck, a professor at the American University Washington College of Law. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, probably broke the law, too, by working with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to undermine the nuclear negotiations with Iran, he says. But Vladeck, co-editor-in-chief of the legal blog Just Security, says senators could argue they were indeed acting with the authority of the United States or more convincingly that the act violates the First Amendment. “The Logan Act is a vestigial and anachronistic holdover from a bygone era,” he says. “There's never been a successful prosecution under the act, and the last indictment was in 1803.”




If the OPs source considers this treason, what does he consider operation Fast and Furious, you know.... Something that actually fits the definition of treason?

Was it also treason when Bush did it? The people that was involved with those operations should be charged just like the people that break the Logan act should also be charged.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Well now i know, how he could afford, to have an advertisement every single time a show went to advertising. Almost burned my damn eyes out, listening to Pryor and Tom cotton go back and forth about the stupidist things. I always had a feeling when I was watching Tom Cotton on TV, that he definetely had other motives at play. I hate the political system we have been left with, a two party system is the worst idea, bc we all know that its really one political party with 2 names, beating the system to death.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

The reason the word "citizen" is included in the Logan Act is to differentiate between ordinary people and those acting in official capacity for the government. It's not included because it doesn't apply to non citizens of the US. To imply that there is no difference between myself and a group of US senators penning a letter to a foreign government is absurd. The law professor said "probably". Not, "they did" and any jury in US would likely agree they did not.

I have said countless times that Bush was a blatant criminal and could be prosecuted for multiple reasons. If it were up to me, he would be bunking right next to Obama and Holder.
edit on 12-3-2015 by Helious because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Helious

Strip away the politically charged words and you're still left with the facts and those facts are highly suggestive. Barring the discovery of some sort of communication that plainly states that letter was payback for the money, it would be all but impossible to prove. That doesn't make it any less concerning does it?


Senators of the United States are not considered "citizens" and certainly didn't act without official US authority because they are in fact 1/3 of all US authority.


That's a strange argument. Firstly, holding office doesn't change your legal status as a citizen. Where are you coming up with that? Furthermore, using that bizarre oversimplification of the division of powers, the President and the Democrats in Congress would have authority to pass legislation unilaterally. Of course they don't, because powers are specifically vested. The Constitution, the preponderance of legal interpretations and historical precedence exclusively grant the power to negotiate treaties and agreements to the President and those he authorizes to do so.

Nothing bars members of Congress from corresponding with foreign leaders but deliberately taking actions intended to sabotage ongoing negotiations of a treaty or agreement is at the very least an egregious overreach.


2.) Was the letter Illegal under? Answer: Nope


It might be but it doesn't matter. Nobody has ever been prosecuted under the Logan act in 216 years and only one person was ever indicted (1803). The language is vague and may conflict with First Amendment protections. It's basically something that is brought up from time to time as an admonishment or a threat.


3.) If the OPs source considers this treason, what does he consider operation Fast and Furious, you know.... Something that actually fits the definition of treason?


Lots of things wrong with your logic here. Treason requires traitorous intent and a betrayal of allegiance, it has to be during wartime, etc. So no, Fast and Furious doesn't "actually fit the definition of treason." It's also clear that the Senators who signed the letter did not commit treason as it's defined in US law. Doesn't make it any less deplorable though does it?
edit on 2015-3-12 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Are we getting another thread to see how many Americans use their hatred for Obama to mask their allegiance for Israel? Should be amusing.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

They are ******* desperate!




posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Helious



The reason the word "citizen" is included in the Logan Act is to differentiate between ordinary people and those acting in official capacity for the government.

They wasn't acting in the official capacity of the government. Like I said and you must have missed there was no motion in the Senate of any kind for this letter had there been then they would have been acting in the official capacity of the government. Just because they are members of the Senate in no way means everything they do is in the official capacity of the government.


To imply that there is no difference between myself and a group of US senators penning a letter to a foreign government is absurd.

You are the one that said and I quote.

Senators of the United States are not considered "citizens"



The law professor said "probably". Not, "they did" and any jury in US would likely agree they did not.

Wrong when a law professor says probably then it most likely means that they did break the Logan act. If he meant that the didn't break it then he would have just said they didn't break it.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

They are ******* desperate!



WTF was he talking about?

I'm pretty sure a couple of those were false flags...



Strange characters involved!



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Why would another country be contributing money for an election in the US unless they were getting something out of it.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

I didn't vote for either him or his opponent. As a mater of fact I haven't voted but once in the past 25 years because I consider it a waste of time at this stage and even though I consider myself a conservative constitutionalists Tom Cotton is a neocon of the Nth degree and will do his best to support the traitor in my opinion, John McCain and Lindsy Graham.

To top all of this off one of our state senators is even proposing state legislation that would allow Cotton to run for either president or vice president in 2020. Can anyone believe this garbage? Tom Cotton as vice or president of the us. What insanity.

Arkansas Senate would let Cotton seek 2 jobs in 2020
www.katv.com...

edit on 12-3-2015 by CharlesT because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlesT

The guy has the makings of a Manchurian candidate.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Helious

Strip away the politically charged words and you're still left with the facts and those facts are highly suggestive. Barring the discovery of some sort of communication that plainly states that letter was payback for the money, it would be all but impossible to prove. That doesn't make it any less concerning does it?


Senators of the United States are not considered "citizens" and certainly didn't act without official US authority because they are in fact 1/3 of all US authority.


That's a strange argument. Firstly, holding office doesn't change your legal status as a citizen. Where are you coming up with that? Furthermore, using that bizarre oversimplification of the division of powers, the President and the Democrats in Congress would have authority to pass legislation unilaterally. Of course they don't, because powers are specifically vested. The Constitution, the preponderance of legal interpretations and historical precedence exclusively grant the power to negotiate treaties and agreements to the President and those he authorizes to do so.

Nothing bars members of Congress from corresponding with foreign leaders but deliberately taking actions intended to sabotage ongoing negotiations of a treaty or agreement is at the very least an egregious overreach.


2.) Was the letter Illegal under? Answer: Nope


It might be but it doesn't matter. Nobody has ever been prosecuted under the Logan act in 216 years and only one person was ever indicted (1803). The language is vague and may conflict with First Amendment protections. It's basically something that is brought up from time to time as an admonishment or a threat.


3.) If the OPs source considers this treason, what does he consider operation Fast and Furious, you know.... Something that actually fits the definition of treason?


Lots of things wrong with your logic here. Treason requires traitorous intent and a betrayal of allegiance, it has to be during wartime, etc. So no, Fast and Furious doesn't "actually fit the definition of treason." It's also clear that the Senators who signed the letter did not commit treason as it's defined in US law. Doesn't make it any less deplorable though does it?


Give me a break, honestly. You and others that would like to play the semantics game are grasping at straws. They would be drinking slurpees in hell before anyone had the audacity to try to prosecute any of the republican senators under the act in question.

Regardless of your rhetorical gymnastics, the word citizens in the Act does not apply to United States senators, much less a coalition of them representing multiple states. They won't be prosecuted not because the Act is outdated but because there is no standing. Any simpleton can read the language of the law and realize that. If you think differently, it's because you watch liberal media and they have "professionals" who state they "probably" or "most likely" did.

They didn't, it was legal, lawful and while in in my opinion wasn't the best idea, talking about treason is just ignorant. Stay classy.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010




They wasn't acting in the official capacity of the government. Like I said and you must have missed there was no motion in the Senate of any kind for this letter had there been then they would have been acting in the official capacity of the government. Just because they are members of the Senate in no way means everything they do is in the official capacity of the government.


I'm sorry to inform you but..... They were acting in the official capacity of government. There is no clause in the Constitution nor the Logan Act that states that United States Senators must make a motion or a vote before penning a letter. If I missed anything there, please enlighten me to my error. If you can not then please accept that the legislative branch being an equal third of the United States government is allowed to express themselves to foreign government and it's considered "official".

I find your argument lacking because the bullet points of it have no merit in law nor the Constitution and you base your opinions on faulty, loose wording of a law that does not apply to the senators.



posted on Mar, 12 2015 @ 11:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Great find! F&S for the OP!

Not really surprised though. IMO, the GOP sold their loyalty to the highest bidder a long time ago.

Actually doing something good for the average American is last thing on their minds because they're so blinded by the money and they're even willing to send our kids to war in support of those donors. It makes my stomach turn.

These people need to be prosecuted and jailed, immediately.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Man, I called this when it broke. Even said so on another thread.

The timing of Nutty's visit and the letter were just too much. So now we know the dude is an AIPAC tool and he is brand new to Congress. That sure did not take long.



posted on Mar, 13 2015 @ 09:53 PM
link   
This is different than Hillary Clinton receiving tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments how?

You condemn him for getting a little less than a mill from Israel, condemn Hillary fifteen times over for each million they get from Saudi Arabia.

Typical Liberal Hypocrite.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<<   2 >>

log in

join