Home

Obama: No, I Didn't Interfere With That Agreement, I Interfered With a Different One

By Brian Simpson - Posted on September 17th, 2008
Tagged:

Amir Taheri broke the news the other day that Senator Obama tried to delay an agreement on the troop levels in Iraq. This brought up the question of “Did Obama violate the Logan Act?”. As I stated the other day, Obama’s clearest defense of the Logan Act would be to claim that he was under the authority of the State Department (a highly dubious outcome). Alas, Senator Obama went with a different route:

OBAMA OBJECTS by Amir Taheri

The Obama campaign has objected. While its statement says my article was “filled with distortions,” the rebuttal actually centers on a technical point: the differences between two Iraqi-US accords under negotiation - the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA, to set rules governing US military personnel in Iraq) and the Strategic Framework Agreement (SFA, to settle the legal basis for the US military presence in Iraq in the months and years ahead).

His defense is that he didn’t interfere with the Status of Forces Agreement, but that he did interfere with the Strategic Framework Agreement. My question to the Senator is this: How does this still not constitute a violation of the Logan Act? Are you or are you not still guilty of interfering in the foreign policy of the Bush Administration (something that I showed the other day was the sole property of the Administration)?

Alas, the Logan Act has no teeth. Otherwise this would surely end Senator Obama’s chances at the White House.

Cross-posted at RedState.

login or register to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
DocJ's picture
First rule of holes, Chosen One.
Submitted by DocJ on Wed, 2008-09-17 06:45.

Oh, I forgot - that only applies to the unenlightened.

Just another Democrat pol trying to play Commander in Chief in his spare, lightworking time, folks. Nothing to see here - move along. Now.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
Brian Simpson's picture
This is just chock full of disingenuousness
Submitted by Brian Simpson on Wed, 2008-09-17 06:46.

From a reader at The Campaign Spot

The time between Obama’s meeting with Iraqi Foreign Minister on July 22 of this year and when the next president takes office on January 20 of next year is six months. Using Obama’s own numbers, holding off the way he wishes will cost the United States an extra $60 billion.

I think I can say, and say with pride, that we have legislatures that bring higher prices than any in the world. ~ Mark Twain

login or register to post comments
DocJ's picture
Move along, Brian.
Submitted by DocJ on Wed, 2008-09-17 06:49.

Rules don't apply to Messiahs, don't you know.

Don't make me get Biden in here to explain it to you...

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

login or register to post comments
David Hinz's picture
any other politician on the face of this earth
Submitted by David Hinz on Wed, 2008-09-17 08:11.

this would be news.

with the Obamessiah?

move along, nothing to see here, move along...

login or register to post comments
Knight_of_the_Mind's picture
According to Barack's Own Rhetoric
Submitted by Knight_of_the_Mind on Wed, 2008-09-17 09:18.

Each month we stay in Iraq sets us nack another $10B. That could buy us 1/8 of an AIG!

Election 2008: Now, at long last, I really and truly believe the GOP can do this!

login or register to post comments
Brutus149's picture
Barry stopped Iraqis from fully taking over for their defense?
Submitted by Brutus149 on Wed, 2008-09-17 11:14.

There's no need to make up erroneous reasons to question Barry's change rhetoric. There are other real ones out there.

Unless you think Barry interfered with the Iraqis making a deal to withdraw all US combat forces.

login or register to post comments
Knight_of_the_Mind's picture
He Certainly Did
Submitted by Knight_of_the_Mind on Wed, 2008-09-17 11:35.

If he attempted to undermine the SOFA, he attempted to undermine the platform of stability that both Pres. Bush and Gen Petraeus described as a necessary precondition to the large-scale withdrawal of US forces from iraq. This was well known and published throughout the media.

Election 2008: Now, at long last, I really and truly believe the GOP can do this!

login or register to post comments
Brian Simpson's picture
Go read the rest of the article Brutus
Submitted by Brian Simpson on Wed, 2008-09-17 12:32.

The two different agreements are linked. Disrupting the SFA automatically damages the SOFA. His camp has admitted that they wanted the SFA pushed off. That means that in effect they have attempted to push off SOFA as a result.

So, yes, it is appropriate to say that Obama cost the US $60B according to his own math.

I think I can say, and say with pride, that we have legislatures that bring higher prices than any in the world. ~ Mark Twain

login or register to post comments
Brutus149's picture
Its a small technical point.
Submitted by Brutus149 on Wed, 2008-09-17 22:41.

But it looks like the worst case scenario is Barry shanked a tire that was flat to begin with and did no material harm. Unless there was actually going a be a large scale withdrawal had Barry not asked a question which implicitly implied the next administration could give more favorable terms.

login or register to post comments
Brutus149's picture
"Logan Act has no teeth"
Submitted by Brutus149 on Wed, 2008-09-17 11:05.

http://theforvm.org/diary/bird-dog/did-obama-negotiate-us-foreign-and-military-policy-with-iraqi-leaders

Quote:
So here's what I conclude so far. The Obama campaign is blowing smoke in their efforts to try to make distinctions between SoFA and SFA, and Obama clearly suggested to the Iraqi foreign minister that SoFA negotiations be delayed until the next administration (preferably his, I'm sure) takes office. Taheri is vindicated part way, maybe even most way. His earlier column placed Obama in Iraq when these things were said, and he can't support that Obama made demands. However, it appears Taheri is reasonably accurate in saying that Obama "tried in private to persuade" Iraqi leaders, which may be a violation in the Logan Act because Obama was not authorized to negotiate on behalf of the U.S. government. If convicted, the penalty is up to three years in federal prison, although there is no known record of any convictions or prosecutions.

More or less the same conclusion.

login or register to post comments