Because the Obama didn't want it to happen. Apparently some think that's a solid reason for things not to happen. Honestly this should be a reminder to the president that he has no power over the daily activity in the congress and that having a contentious relationship with congress is a really bad idea but who knows.
Because it undermines the President's authority, makes America look weak to the rest of the world, and is generally a dick move - both on Boehner's part and Netanyahu's. Even Fox News is outraged at Boehner and Netanyahu's plan to undermine Obama http://www.vox.com/2015/1/24/7884311/netanyahu-boehner-fox-news <iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/eHWbqwh4PB0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> One of the things that frustrates me is that some of the conservatives here are SO hateful of Obama, that they let their hate cloud their respect for America and the power of the Presidency. Even bigtexxx a while back started speaking favorably of Russia and Putin at the expense of the Presidency. Bush, as disastrous as he was, still got the utmost respect from me because he was our leader. If another country's president - even an ally - or Democratic leaders in the House then had tried to pull off this underhanded move, it would've been extremely disrespectful and in poor taste.
“To make you get a sense of really how, forgive me, wicked, this whole thing is, the Secretary of State John Kerry met with the Israeli Ambassador to the United States for two hours on Tuesday, Ron Dermer. The ambassador never mentioned the fact that Netanyahu was in negotiations and finally agreed to come to Washington, not to see the president, but to go to Capitol Hill, speak to a joint session of Congress and criticize the president’s policy. I have to say I’m shocked.” - Fox News host Chris Wallace
This congressional session just began, the low approval rating of "congress" is based on the incompetence of the last several congressional sessions, which is why the opposition party took even more seats than anyone thought they would. They were brought in to check the president and force him to the negotiation table, sure he's resisting now, but he has a chance to eventually learn his lesson and get positive things done like Clinton did when he lost congress. Only time will tell if this president is willing and intelligent enough to follow in Clinton's footsteps.
What's really funny is you think that's true. Anyway, please don't derail the thread. This is about Boehner and republicans undermining the foreign policy decisions of a sitting president.
Boehner Criticized By Jewish Leaders Over Invitation To Netanyahu J Street, a fairly liberal, pro-peace group that advocates for Israel “This invitation looks like a thinly veiled attempt to scuttle the critical negotiations taking place right now aimed at ensuring that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon. Bibi and Obama disagree on how to deal with Iran, and that’s fair. But a foreign leader lobbying Congress is inappropriate.” The Israeli publication Haaretz “Netanyahu is shooting himself in the foot because, by turning this into a partisan issue, he may be forcing some Democratic members to choose between Boehner and Obama, which, for them, is no choice at all.” Haaretz also reports that protests from Israelis are ‘pouring’ into Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office in Jerusalem. Reporter Chemi Shavez said that a prominent, mainstream Jewish leader told him: “I was literally sick to my stomach when I heard about it.” Haaretz gave the most succinct description of what’s happening and its consequences, “Netanyahu certainly seems to have forgotten that if he wins the elections and returns as prime minister, it is he who will then have to figure out how to survive for the next two years in the barren landscape and scorched earth that he left behind him this week.”
Of course you're right Air. And he is Probably deserves it's own thread. Obama, Modi declare era of 'new trust' in US-India relations NEW DELHI (AP) — President Barack Obama and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday declared an era of "new trust" in the often fraught relationship between their nations as the U.S. leader opened a three-day visit to New Delhi. Standing side by side at the stately Hyderabad House, Obama and Modi cited progress toward putting in place a landmark civil nuclear agreement, as well as advances on climate change and defense ties.
The only sad thing is that congress shouldn't have time to host a template presentation from a decade-old friend given all the things congress should be doing to alleviate major domestic issues which actually affect more than 90% of Americans. Even then, there are American allies in far greater need to speak to congress than the monkeys in charge of Israel and 'Palestine'. That should be bad, regardless of which sub section of politics you support. Leave it to you guys to forge a way to make it a silly argument between two parties largely unified on foreign policy.
Bibi is desperate if he has to speak before congress to win an election. Obama didn't want to give him an advantage but congress is happy to help him get re-elected. And Bibi is essentially now saying he is aligned with Republicans and against Democrats. No longer is the USA the ally of Israel. The Republicans are allied with Bibi. It's a dangerous precedent. It now puts issues of disarming Iran and key global issues in a fractured way. This can severely weaken our country. So sad that the Republican leadership is willing to hurt the USA so they can score a point against their enemy in Obama. Seems they forget who America's real enemies are.
It's one thing to criticize the foreign policy decisions of the opposing party. I get that! But to actively undermine a sitting President boarders on treason.
Eh, it's a little rude but seems like fair game to me. It's trodding a bit on the Executive's turf, but the various branches of government have some wide lattitude to act until someone dares to call them out on it and bring some action to stop them. This is a lot like Obama's executive action on immigration, where he's trodding a bit on Congress' turf and daring Congress to do something about it. Now Boehner is daring Obama to do something about his trespasses. I don't have a big problem with either one.
He may have committed a crime but treason is still a question yet to be proven.Per the Logan act he doesn't have the authority to do so. The Logan Act, passed in 1799 and amended in 1904, states that no citizen of the United States can act on behalf of the United States government without its explicit approval. Boehner, as a Member of Congress, is not authorized to conduct foreign policy dealings that are explicitly the purview of the executive branch.
Isn't Boehner as the Speaker of the House (and 2nd in line in Presidential Succesion) a de facto member of the United States Government? It's at least arguable that this certainly makes him qualified to negotiate on behalf of the United States government (which isn't the case here anyways. No negotiation is taking place...just a speech before Congress.) I've read some definitions online of the "Logan Act" and have yet to see any instances where it was applied to someone who was a government official at the time. Is there such precedence?
This all should be self-explanatory and I hold out hope that the OP and the poster you are responding to don't actually believe anything they are saying and that they aren't completely and properly r****ded. Thinking that the speaker of the house can't invite someone to speak to the house of representatives or that it would somehow be illegal or treasonous is one of the most laughably pathetic takes that I've seen in the D&D.....and that says a lot given some of the things that are said down here.
