Dem senator's El Salvador trip might violate law liberals used as pretext for Michael Flynn probe: critics Sen. Chris Van Hollen’s, D-Md., sudden trip to El Salvador to try to free deportee Kilmar Abrego Garcia is getting the attention of critics who believe the Maryland Democrat may have violated a 1799 law prohibiting unauthorized diplomacy. The Logan Act – named for former Pennsylvania Sen. George Logan – stipulates a fine and/or imprisonment for Americans corresponding with foreign officials "with intent to influence the[ir] measures … in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States."
Stop with the spam, do the decent thing and think about what you post before you reflexively flick it up here. Senators aren’t bound to get clearance from the State Department for fact-finding missions or advocacy trips especially when they're addressing constituent concerns or following up on known judicial irregularities. Congress is (at least) a coequal branch of government, not a subordinate one. And you disgusting arse picker, Flynn was not prosecuted under the Logan act. This law has been around for 225 years without a single successful prosecution. It was merely referenced to be a point of leverage rather than the basis of a legal action. Flynn was not a Senator and was not sworn in.
Flynn is not only a traitor but an ass-kisser as well. He thought he was going to be secretary of defense but Trump does not like people who make money using his name and promptly flung him under the bus. Imagine being passed over for a guy like Hegseth Flynn was heartbroken. Imagine being passed over for a guy like Hegseth.
FFS, though my mom was a historian I have little more than moderate grasp of history and without searching I can confidently tell you that Logan was a private citizen who went to France and tried to interfere. This was the whole point of the Logan act. He ran for office after this. That's the pretty famous thing about the affair. It's one of those ironic footnotes that begs to be remembered. But please post your source. And see a doctor about your brain.
I really do try to avoid giving Fox News any clicks, and I don’t need to read that article to know your statement was wrong. The real question is: do you know it was wrong? And if you do, can you say it? If you don’t use your mind to work through things with memory and logic, you’ll lose those mental faculties. We only keep the skills we practice. I’m sure you’re still a decent billiards player, but that’s not going to stop you from being suckered when the line between fact and your feeling starts to blur with age. Use it or lose it. History is to politics what thermodynamics is to engineering: foundational, not optional. You can’t reason forward if you don’t understand what came before. Perhaps what knowing prior art is to prosecuting a patent? Without it, you can’t tell what’s novel, what’s obvious, or even what’s nonsense.
Nope. All my responses take some effort to try and minimise error. You read trash, the repeat trash and you know people look down on your lack of hygiene and go to the lengths of trying to mask the URL. You are not mentally fit to use the word "debate". You are not even a man who can say, I was wrong. You squeal like the picaninny child caught by his toe in the old nursery stories. We are not alike.