henry quirk wrote:"The outcome does not establish the truth of the matter."
I don't recall sayin' it did.
'nuff said.
Except that you are wrong to suggest that a Congress man has legislative duties that extend to matter of foreign policy.
Now 'nuff said.
The question becomes does a congress man's stating the obvious, constitute undermining the negotiating authority of the President? Is it treason or free speech?
What if the President is making promises and establishing conditions that are contrary to the will of the people, as expressed through the elected representatives.
The US Constitution gives much of the foreign policy decision-making to the presidency, but the Senate has a role in ratifying treaties, and the Supreme Court interprets treaties when cases are presented to it.
Our current President, the honorable Barack Obama has been overly gracious and noble in all references to this matter.
I am sure the President is embarrassed and ashamed of the childish actions by these 47 individuals but he will not pursue criminal charges.
My opinion of the esteemed President Barack Obama has grown because of this matter and this is reflected in President Obama's growing approval numbers.
Well, if honorable President Barack Obama gives a nod to a presidential candidate for the upcoming 2016 elections that could go a long way for that candidate to become elected.
Bill Wiltrack wrote:.
Well, if honorable President Barack Obama gives a nod to a presidential candidate for the upcoming 2016 elections that could go a long way for that candidate to become elected.
I'd have thought he'd have to give the nod to whoever his party chose?
