A letter sent to Iran’s leaders by 47 elected officials has taken the country — and, perhaps, the world — by storm. It was an unprecedented attempt to interfere with peace talks — an actual communication from those who have been entrusted with the safety and security of our nation to the leaders of a country with which we are in tenuous negotiations regarding an agreement that could benefit the world.
Unbelievably, to these traitorous men and women, hating President Obama has proved to be of more importance than the prospect of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power.
A petition asking that all 47 of these Senators who openly attempted to sabotage talks with Iran be charged under the Logan Act gained the required number of signatures in less than 24 hours. The American people are furious that these lawmakers would so brazenly sabotage our national security, and the security of other nations, simply because they wished to throw a partisan temper tantrum.
The Logan Act reads:
§ 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.
Some may say that these are elected officials who have every right to contact foreign leaders and sabotage negotiations no matter what. However, in 1936, it was established in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp that:
[T]he President alone has the power to speak or listen as a representative of the nation. He makes treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate; but he alone negotiates. Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it.
Justice Sutherland, who presided over the case, cited the Committee on Foreign Relations report to the Senate of February 15, 1816:
The President is the constitutional representative of the United States with regard to foreign nations. He manages our concerns with foreign nations, and must necessarily be most competent to determine when, how, and upon what subjects negotiation may be urged with the greatest prospect of success. For his conduct, he is responsible to the Constitution.
These men had no authority — Constitutional or no — to engage in this line of communication with the leaders of Iran.
Unsurprisingly, this embarrassing episode provided quite a bit of humor for Iran’s leadership, who noted in response that “it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.”
“Change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.” Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif said pointedly in his response. “I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law.”
Even Fox News’ Megyn Kelly could not resist lightly hammering the leader of this coalition of idiots. Kelly opened up by pointing out that the Wall Street Journal called the actions of Cotton and his cohorts to be a “distraction.”
“Well, on the contrary, Megyn, I think that this debate we’re having is incredibly important and helpful to raising just what a bad deal President Obama is about to make with Iran,” Cotton replied. “The last two days, we’ve focused on the terms of the deal, which is: One, President Obama will accept a 10-year sunset clause; and two, he has conceded a vast Iranian enrichment capability.”
“But what’s the point in writing to the Iranian mullahs? What are you gonna do?”Kelly asked. “They dismissed it already like ‘pfft, whatever,’ and you’ve offended the Obama administration and you may have offended some of the Democrats who would have come over with the Republicans depending on what happens with this deal, to have a stronger say in the Senate.”
Cotton repeated his claim that Iran’s leaders, who just finished schooling Republicans on the Constitution, don’t understand our Constitution. “So we need to be crystal clear with the leaders of Iran: Any deal that’s not approved by Congress won’t be accepted by Congress,” he said. “Not now, and certainly not in the future, because Congress is focused on stopping Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Today, tomorrow and 10 years from now.”
Asked about Vice President Joe Biden’s statement that the letter is “beneath the dignity of an institution” he reveres, Cotton responded that Biden’s “focus on the process just goes to show he knows he can’t defend the deal.”
Then, he challenged Biden to a debate:
I would be happy to debate Vice President Biden, one on one, at any time, in a place of his choosing, maybe right here on your show, Megyn.
I, for one, hope Biden accepts this imbecile’s challenge.
You can watch that segment in the video below.
Featured image via YouTube screen capture
Send to Kindle
