Is Obama Illegally and Improperly Interfering in U.S. Foreign Policy?

Excellent questions raised on this issue. I doubt the MSM other than FOX will delve into it though.

Obama is exhibiting another pattern of behavior in saying one thing to the American public and another to Foreign Governments in addition to involving himself where he has no right to…
Iraq- troop withdrawl
Canada- NAFTA
FARC- files found indicating a percieved support
from Obama
Khadafi’s endorsement and public announcing of
Obama saying what he needs to to get elected
Hamas endorsement
Great Britian- reports of Obama marketers helping to
sway elections there
Kenya- Obama’s campaigning for Odinga

He believes he’s King of the World, has no respect for our sovereignty.

Obama, after a very stupid speech finishes his speech by calling himself smart. He actually called himself smart. Applause.

Yes, friends, Barack Obama behaved so treacherously, he even told reporters about it at the time.

Here’s what NBC reported online, June 16:

“He said he told Zebari that netotiations for a Status of Forces agreement or strategic framework agreement… should be done in the open and with Congress’s authorization…. He argued it would make sense to hold off on such negotiations until the next administrations.”

So I guess the firing squad shouldn’t lock and load just yet, huh?

I think hypocrisy is TOO an issue here.

Jane Fonda obamba, The little boy should have a lot in common with Hanoi Jane they are both NUTS

Absolutely correct. No one other than President or whom he sends on HIS behalf, is allowed to negotiate, or attempt at secret deals, let alone when it affects our Military and security.

Barry’s new lastname HObama, selling anything and every one for a buck!

FROM THE CONFLUENCE:

Obama appears to use US soldiers as pawns to win the presidency

Posted on September 15, 2008 by garychapelhill

We have been discussing the NY Post article this morning in comments, but I feel it warrants its own post. It appears that while on his World Tour this summer, Obama was trying to negotiate a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq. That by itself would be inappropriate enough, but Obama takes it a step further by suggesting that Iraq delay troop withdrawals until after the US election, so he could, in true Obama form, take credit for the work of others.

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obamamade his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Some people have suggested, rightfully so, that the Post is hardly a friendly newspaper to Democrats, but the author of this article cites his source directly. There is no innuendo or “unidentified sources”. Taheri quotes the Iraqi Foreign Minister, Zebari, in quotation marks, from an interview. The one question I have is who did the interview to which he is referring? Is it the Post or some other news agency? If anyone out there has any info, please let us know. To get a sense of who Zebari is, here is a snippet of an interview he did with Wolf Blitzer on June 15th just prior to Obama’s visit:

BLITZER: John McCain says U.S. troops should remain in Iraq until victory has been achieved, a thriving, secure, Democratic Iraq. Barack Obama says the troops should start leaving, U.S. troops, over 16 months; there should be a withdrawal, if he’s president. Because he says you need that, kind of, timeline in order to force the Iraqi government, your government, to do what you know you need to do.
ZEBARI: Yes. Wolf, I think Iraq would be a major issue in the campaign.
BLITZER: Here in the United States.
ZEBARI: In the United States — I mean, as the campaign develops, toward November, I’m sure Iraq will come back to haunt bothcandidates. But I would say one thing, I think, that’s my message to both Senator McCain and Senator Obama, who I have the chance to speak to him tomorrow, that, really, Iraq has gone a long way.
I mean, Iraq has been to hell many times and back. And now we have the right policies, the right personnel, and we have a committed government to accomplish its national agenda.
And the surge strategy has worked. I have just reported to the Security Council, a couple of days ago, that Iraq is witnessing the lowest level of violence and terrorist attacks…
BLITZER: So that would suggest that it is a moment, right now, an opportunity for the U.S. to start to withdraw troops?
ZEBARI: Well, those troops, those American units, actually, who came and participated in the surge strategy have already started…
BLITZER: Not all of them. There’s still about 150,000 troops in Iraq.
ZEBARI: I know. But they’ve started to pull out, actually. And as we develop our security forces, our capabilities, definitely, we’ll be less reliant on American support and military presence.
But this is a process. I think we are not there yet. I think both candidates have to look hard at the issues. Because Iraq is not an island; it’s not isolated. It lives that heart of the Arab world and Islamic world.
BLITZER: So you want U.S. troops to stay?
ZEBARI: I think, for the time being, it’s very important, you see, that we need this continued support of the U.S. forces, of the multi-nationalforces, because of the gains we have gained, both security, military, economic, are still vulnerable, and we need to capitalize on them, to make them durable.
BLITZER: Here’s the issue on the agenda right now, this authorization for 150,000, which is the current number of U.S. troops in Iraq, to remain beyond the end of this year when the United Nations mandate ends.
There’s negotiations under way between the Bush administration and your government on what’s called a status of forces agreement, that would define the terms allowing the U.S. to maintain a significant military presence in Iraq.
What would be the terms?
Your prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, said on Friday — and I’m quoting, and I’ll put it up on the screen — “The Iraqi demands are unacceptable to the Americans and the American demands are unacceptable to the Iraqis, and the result is that we have reached an impasse. The Iraqis will not consent to an agreement that infringes their sovereignty.”
BLITZER: Now, if there’s a deadlock, there’s not going to be an authorization for American troops to stay in Iraq beyond December 31st. What happens then?
ZEBARI: Wolf, before come coming to your show I spoke to Baghdad, to the prime minister office, just to clarify this issue. So I’m pleased to report to you, really, that statement has been corrected.
BLITZER: The prime minister’s statement is no longer operable.
ZEBARI: I think it’s been corrected and clarified. Let’s say to the media that this negotiation, these talks are ongoing. They’re not dead.
BLITZER: So you have not reached an impasse?
ZEBARI: Definitely. There hasn’t been an impasse and there are options as the prime minister has explained to the Iraqi people and to the public opinion that this is ongoing and I’m a member of the negotiating team. So, I know what’s going on. We made a great deal of progress on finalizing the strategic framework agreement.

It appears from what Mr. Zebari says that the negotiations with the Bush administration were indeed ongoing at the time. It seems pretty clear that Obama was trying to negotiate a deal of his own. That seems like dangerous ground for a presidential candidate. So what exactly did Obama have in mind? I don’t think his fan base would approve:

Though Obama claims the US presence is “illegal,” he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the “weakened Bush administration,” Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined.

Obamahas made many contradictory statements with regard to Iraq. His latest position is that US combat troops should be out by 2010. Yet his effort to delay an agreement would make that withdrawal deadline impossible to meet.

Towards the end of the article, Taheri does take some editorial license to critque Obama’s Iraqi policy. I think Obama and his fans might find his choice of words a little stinging

To be credible, his foreign-policy philosophy requires Iraq to be seen as a failure, a disaster, a quagmire, a pig with lipstick or any of the other apocalyptic adjectives used by the American defeat industry in the past five years. (emphasis mine)

This is bad news for Obama. I find it hard to believe that Taheri would make up quotes from the Iraqi foreign minister. And if the minister is lying, that doesn’t bode well for US/Iraqi relations if Obama wins. This would seem to fit a pattern of Obama’s disregard for the troops, including his snubbing of injured soldiers in Germany. No matter what, it looks like its gonna be another bad week for The One. Couldn’t happen to a more deserving guy.

***UPDATE*** Several commenters have suggested that this is similar to Ronald Reagan’s use of American hostages in Iran as pawns by negotiating their release after the US presidential election. The hostages were eventually released on Reagan’s Innaguration Day. Judge for yourself:

The official history states that after winning the election, before his inauguration, Reagan pushed hard for a resolution. Using the Algerian government as intermediaries successful negotiations were completed. However ther eis strong evidence of what is termed the “Ootober Surprise” took place.

This is the name for the substantuve allegation that representatives of the Reagan presidential campaign made a deal at two sets of meetings in July and August at the Ritz Hotel in Madrid with Iranians to delay the release of Americans held hostage in Iran until after the November 1980 presidential elections, so that Reagan’s opponent, then President Jimmy Carter, whose team had been negotiating, wouldn’t gain a popularity boost (an ‘October Surprise’) before election day.

I couldn’t resist using DKospedia as my source

Then Obama is toast? How many times has someone said that and we’re still here, ugh!

Who else could get away with all of this and not be held accountable?

I know GWB and Dick Cheney sure I agree but they aren’t running again.

Aren’t Democrats supposed to be better than this?

How does a Constitutional Lawyer make mistakes?

Barack Obama Traitor in Chief

“The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.

Huh?

The Foreign Minister seems to disagree with that conclusion according to the NYPost interview.
Am I reading this right? O goes to Iraq and assures their government that no agreement Iraq is struggling to achieve will be honored by O OR MCCAIN? Does Mccain know this?

Still reeling from the depth of the hypocrisy and blatant abuse of every demograph in America. While watching “The O” subsume, annihilate, or trample his way through the primaries, the haunting aloofness remained a constant. I thought, he does NOT understand America at its core. He does not connect with Americans because he is not American at his core. He is a rock star, but so are many non Americans. He is a celebrity. He is articulate. He raises enthusiasm. Like Bono. But Bono is not American either. And, Bono has a record to stand on. O has the dilapidated, oppressive Southside of Chicago. Why doesnt anyone go there for photos?

[ADMINISTRATOR: Comment removed for inappropriate content.]

typewriterstreaming,

my last post was for you;

Obama’s denial of the troop withdrawal comments is befitting of a stupid shoplifter who is convinced he won’t be caught. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

So obama is calling Zebari a liar?? WOW!!! WTF

OBAMA IS DENYING!!!
BECAUSE
OBAMA IS LYING!!!

FOX NEWS- CAMPAIGN DENIAL!! NO SUCH DISCUSSION EVER TOOK PLACE

Barack Obama’s campaign denied a New York Post report Monday that said the Democratic presidential candidate privately tried to persuade Iraqi political leaders to stall an agreement on scaling back American troops in Iraq while publicly campaigning for a speedy withdrawal.

Obama’s request for a delay was a major theme of his talks with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari said in an interview with the Post.

Obama also tried to persuade the U.S. commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to offer a “realistic withdrawal date,” the Post reported. The commanders declined, the newspaper said.

A top foreign policy adviser to Obama sat in on the meetings between the candidate and Iraqi officials this summer and said no such conversations occurred, the campaign said Monday.

However MSNBC covered exactly what he said back in JUNE!!!

OBAMA’s TALK WITH IRAQI FORIEGN MINISTER

Posted: Monday, June 16, 2008 2:22 PM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ’s Athena Jones
FLINT, Mich. — Obama reiterated his commitment to withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq during a telephone conversation this morning with the country’s foreign minister, he told reporters in a 10-minute press conference on the tarmac here.

The presumptive Democratic nominee told Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari that he looked forward to seeing him in Baghdad and told reporters he also wanted to visit Afghanistan, saying the situation there continued to deteriorate — noting a prison break this past weekend. He declined to specify when such trips would take place, but said he would like to go before the election.

VIDEO: NBC’s Richard Engel, author of “War Journal: My Five Years in Iraq” joins the “Morning Joe” team to discuss the progress of the war.

The men spoke about the progress U.S. troops have made in helping to reduce the violence in Iraq but Obama told Zebari troop withdrawals must go forward.

“I emphasized to him how encouraged I was by the reductions in violence in Iraq, but also insisted that it is important for us to begin the process of withdrawing U.S. troops, making clear that we have no interest in permanent bases in Iraq,” the senator said. “I gave him an assurance that should we be elected, an Obama administration will make sure that we continue with the progress that’s been made in Iraq, that we won’t act precipitously, but that we will move to end U.S. combat forces in Iraq in a manner that’s as careful as we were careless getting in.”

The need to withdraw is twofold, Obama said. Reprising an argument he has been making for months, he cited the need to encourage the Iraqi government to make the political accommodations on matters like oil revenues and provincial elections, which the surge was supposed to help happen. He argued that the progress made in the South and in Sadr City showed the need not for a longer commitment but a shorter one, because they indicate a greater capacity on the part of Iraqis to deal effectively with their security. Obama said the second reason was the $10- to-12 billion being spent each month in the country, a statistic he often cites when discussing the need to withdraw.

In response to a question about how much flexibility there would be to withdrawal plans, Obama said he still believed U.S. forces could be out of the country within about 16 months and that “I’ve also consistently said that I will consult with military commanders on the ground and that we will always be open to the possibility of tactical adjustments. The important thing is to send a clear signal to the Iraqi people and most importantly to the Iraqi leadership that the U.S. occupation in Iraq is finite, it is gonna be coming to a foreseeable end.”

He said he told Zebari that negotiations for a Status of Forces agreement or strategic framework agreement between the two countries should be done in the open and with Congress’s authorization and that it was important that that there be strong bipartisan support for any agreement so that it can be sustained through a future administration. He argued it would make sense to hold off on such negotiations until the next administration.

“My concern is that the Bush administration–in a weakened state politically–ends up trying to rush an agreement that in some ways might be binding to the next administration, whether it was my administration or Sen. McCain’s administration,” Obama said. “The foreign minister agreed that the next administration should not be bound by an agreement that’s currently made.”

And again Here is todays report from NYPost for Comparison!!!!

OBAMA TRIED TO STALL GIS’ IRAQ WITHDRAWAL
Amir Taheri
Last updated: 4:10 am
September 15, 2008
Posted: 4:02 am
September 15, 2008

WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.

According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.

“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.

Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops – and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion.”

“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open.” Zebari says.

Though Obama claims the US presence is “illegal,” he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the “weakened Bush administration,” Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.

While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined.

DENIAL?

BUSTED AGAIN BACKTRACK OBUMMER!!!!!

This one has actually pissed me off enough AND SCARED me enough, that he would have the audacity to negotiate conditions in Iraq that I submitted a tip to teh FBI through the Department of Justice website. Please, everyone who is concerned with the hubris this man is taking and the arrogance he is displaying as well as the lives he is putting in danger, take a moment and call your lawmakers, report to the DOJ or FBI and get the word out to as many people as possible about this violation of the Logan Act so that it MIGHT actually be investigated and even acted upon. We can’t have this arrogant pig endangering our troops even more just so he can win an election and say that he had to “step in to fix the horrible blunder”, especially after he finally admitted the surge has been effective.

I don’t want bush to get credit, but the surge actually did help and I don’t want to lose another single soldier over there, especially not in order for a self-righteous, arrogant, sexist, racist pig to do better in an election he shouldn’t even be part of.
If they arrest him and put him on trial, maybe we can actually get Hillary like we should have to begin with.

Amir Taheri has some credibility problems?

The guy is bag of lies with an attached human mouth.

He was also responsible for the debunked story that Iranian UN representative Javad Zarif was involved in the Iranian hostage crisis, and a 1989 book about the Shah of Iran that was discovered to have used non-existent sources, total fabrications falsely attributed to existing sources, and entirely made-up events.

McCain spokesman Randy Scheunemann stated as follows:

At this point, it is not yet clear what official American negotiations Senator Obama tried to undermine with Iraqi leaders, but the possibility of such actions is unprecedented. It should be concerning to all that he reportedly urged that the democratically-elected Iraqi government listen to him rather than the US administration in power. If news reports are accurate, this is an egregious act of political interference by a presidential candidate seeking political advantage overseas. Senator Obama needs to reveal what he said to Iraq’s Foreign Minister during their closed door meeting. The charge that he sought to delay the withdrawal of Americans from Iraq raises serious questions about Senator Obama’s judgment and it demands an explanation.

Wow! Was everyone able to vent? My turn. Obama has inspired interest in this election that we have not seen before. Then Sarah come alone and we have more people charged up about this election. From the get go we all knew this was going to be historic. Now whispers of treason, and abuse of power. What will be next? After Ms. Palin was announced in this, the race was essentially over. With Obama’s stupid actions he virtually has dug his hole very deep. Will he be able to climb out of this? If “We The People” make enough noise over this event, there will not be a need to hold the election.

The Logan Act is a United States federal law that forbids unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments. It was passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994. Violation of the Logan Act is a felony, punishable under federal law with imprisonment of up to three years.