.jpg)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jewish Yale student expresses concern over growing protests | Fox News Video++++
The most recent devastating violence in Israel and Gaza that began on October 7, 2023 has had very disturbing reverberations on our campus – for all of us, students, faculty, staff, and the larger Columbia community. We write now to express grave concerns about how some of our students are being viciously targeted with doxing, public shaming, surveillance by members of our community, including other students, and reprisals from employers. These egregious forms of harassment and efforts to chill otherwise protected speech on campus are unacceptable, and we implore every person in the Columbia University community - faculty, administrators, students, alums, public safety - to do more to protect all of our students while preserving Columbia University as a beacon for “fostering critical thinking and opening minds to different points of view,” as President Shafik wrote to the community in her October 18th message about upholding our collective values.
As scholars who are committed to robust inquiry about the most challenging matters of our time, we feel compelled to respond to those who label our students anti-Semitic if they express empathy for the lives and dignity of Palestinians, and/or if they signed on to a student-written statement that situated the military action begun on October 7th within the larger context of the occupation of Palestine by Israel. We have read that statement carefully, and it is worth pointing out that the arguments it makes echo those made by both governmental and non-governmental agencies and institutions at the highest level for a number of years.
The student statement begins with language that should satisfy any measure of decency: “The loss of a human life is a deeply painful and heartbreaking experience for loved ones, regardless of one's affiliation. We extend our heartfelt condolences to the individuals and communities at Columbia University affected by the tragic losses experienced by both Palestinians and Israelis.” The statement then turns to the claim that peace and safety for all the peoples of Israel and Palestine will remain elusive unless and until the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory ends and accountability for that illegal occupation is achieved. This is not a radical or essentially controversial position – indeed, it is the position taken by many committees of the United Nations, the UN General Assembly, and respected human rights organizations. The statement also describes the Israeli treatment of Palestinians as a form of “apartheid”, and while this term is viewed as controversial in some quarters, major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have concluded that the occupation of Palestine and the treatment of Palestinians within Israel amount to a form of apartheid, a crime against humanity with definitions provided in the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (“Apartheid Convention”) and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Indeed, Desmond Tutu, noted South African civil rights leader who was the first Black archbishop of Cape Town, concluded in 2014 that: “[Palestinians’] humiliation is familiar to all black South Africans who were corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the apartheid government.” And President Jimmy Carter has expressed the view that Israel's treatment of Palestinians "perpetrates even worse instances of apartness, or apartheid, than we witnessed even in South Africa."
In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years. One could regard the events of October 7th as just one salvo in an ongoing war between an occupying state and the people it occupies, or as an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation, something anticipated by international humanitarian law in the Second Geneva Protocol. In either case armed resistance by an occupied people must conform to the laws of war, which include a prohibition against the intentional targeting of civilians. The statement reflects and endorses this legal framework, including a condemnation of the killing of civilians.
The statement concludes with a demand that Columbia University reverse a decision to create curricular and research programs in Israel, a demand also made by over 100 Columbia faculty last year, and that the university cease issuing statements that favor the suffering and death of Israelis or Jews over the suffering and death of Palestinians, and/or that fail to recognize how challenging this time has been for all students, not just some.
It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.
We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.
One of the core responsibilities of a world-class university is to interrogate the underlying facts of both settled propositions and those that are ardently disputed. As faculty we are committed to the project of holding discomfort and working across difference with our students. These core academic values and purposes are profoundly undermined when our students are vilified for voicing perspectives that, while legitimately debated in other institutional settings, expose them to severe forms of harassment and intimidation at Columbia.
We ask Columbia University's leadership, our faculty colleagues, Columbia alumni, potential employers of Columbia students, and all who share a commitment to the notion of a just society to join us in condemning, in the strongest of terms, the vicious targeting of our students with doxing, public shaming, surveillance by members of our community, including other students, and reprisals from employers.
Sincerely,
For those who know me, I am not passive but I also believe there are times when you give the enemy more rope and let them hang themselves. I am torn between that approach and calling out the National Guard and bashing some heads and/or breaking some legs of Hamas Americans and anti-Semites. Also, cut off all federal funding.
+++
Does a "robust debate" gives a pass to the threat of one's life? Suppose the threats were directed at blacks?
+++
This letter has now been published here:
An Open Letter from Columbia University and Barnard College Faculty in Defense of Robust Debate About the History and
Meaning of the War in Israel/Gaza:
As scholars who are committed to robust inquiry about the most challenging matters of our time, we feel compelled to respond to those who label our students anti-Semitic if they express empathy for the lives and dignity of Palestinians, and/or if they signed on to a student-written statement that situated the military action begun on October 7th within the larger context of the occupation of Palestine by Israel. We have read that statement carefully, and it is worth pointing out that the arguments it makes echo those made by both governmental and non-governmental agencies and institutions at the highest level for a number of years.
The student statement begins with language that should satisfy any measure of decency: “The loss of a human life is a deeply painful and heartbreaking experience for loved ones, regardless of one's affiliation. We extend our heartfelt condolences to the individuals and communities at Columbia University affected by the tragic losses experienced by both Palestinians and Israelis.” The statement then turns to the claim that peace and safety for all the peoples of Israel and Palestine will remain elusive unless and until the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory ends and accountability for that illegal occupation is achieved. This is not a radical or essentially controversial position – indeed, it is the position taken by many committees of the United Nations, the UN General Assembly, and respected human rights organizations. The statement also describes the Israeli treatment of Palestinians as a form of “apartheid”, and while this term is viewed as controversial in some quarters, major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have concluded that the occupation of Palestine and the treatment of Palestinians within Israel amount to a form of apartheid, a crime against humanity with definitions provided in the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (“Apartheid Convention”) and the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Indeed, Desmond Tutu, noted South African civil rights leader who was the first Black archbishop of Cape Town, concluded in 2014 that: “[Palestinians’] humiliation is familiar to all black South Africans who were corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the apartheid government.” And President Jimmy Carter has expressed the view that Israel's treatment of Palestinians "perpetrates even worse instances of apartness, or apartheid, than we witnessed even in South Africa."
In our view, the student statement aims to recontextualize the events of October 7, 2023, pointing out that military operations and state violence did not begin that day, but rather it represented a military response by a people who had endured crushing and unrelenting state violence from an occupying power over many years. One could regard the events of October 7th as just one salvo in an ongoing war between an occupying state and the people it occupies, or as an occupied people exercising a right to resist violent and illegal occupation, something anticipated by international humanitarian law in the Second Geneva Protocol. In either case armed resistance by an occupied people must conform to the laws of war, which include a prohibition against the intentional targeting of civilians. The statement reflects and endorses this legal framework, including a condemnation of the killing of civilians.
The statement concludes with a demand that Columbia University reverse a decision to create curricular and research programs in Israel, a demand also made by over 100 Columbia faculty last year, and that the university cease issuing statements that favor the suffering and death of Israelis or Jews over the suffering and death of Palestinians, and/or that fail to recognize how challenging this time has been for all students, not just some.
It is worth noting that not all of us agree with every one of the claims made in the students’ statement, but we do agree that making such claims cannot and should not be considered anti-Semitic. Their merits are being debated by governmental and non-governmental agencies at the highest level, and constitute a terrain of completely legitimate political and legal debate.
We are appalled that trucks broadcasting students’ names and images are circling the campus, identifying them individually as “Columbia’s Leading Anti-Semites”, and that some students have had offers of employment withdrawn by employers that sought to punish them for signing the student statement, or for being merely affiliated with student groups associated with the statement. In the absence of university action, students and faculty have undertaken the burden of blocking the images and identifying information broadcast on the doxxing trucks. It is worth noting that most of the students targeted by this doxing campaign are Arab, Muslim, Palestinian, or South Asian.
One of the core responsibilities of a world-class university is to interrogate the underlying facts of both settled propositions and those that are ardently disputed. As faculty we are committed to the project of holding discomfort and working across difference with our students. These core academic values and purposes are profoundly undermined when our students are vilified for voicing perspectives that, while legitimately debated in other institutional settings, expose them to severe forms of harassment and intimidation at Columbia.
We ask Columbia University's leadership, our faculty colleagues, Columbia alumni, potential employers of Columbia students, and all who share a commitment to the notion of a just society to join us in condemning, in the strongest of terms, the vicious targeting of our students with doxing, public shaming, surveillance by members of our community, including other students, and reprisals from employers.
Sincerely,
Katherine Franke
James L. Dohr Professor of Law
Rashid Khalidi
Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies
Gray Tuttle
Luce Professor of Modern Tibet, EALAC, Columbia
Jack Halberstam
The David Feinson Professor of the Humanities, Columbia
James Schamus
Professor of Professional Practice, School of the Arts, Columbia
Alexander Alberro
Professor, Department of Art History, Barnard College
Premilla Nadasen
Ann Whitney Olin Professor of History, Barnard College
Ralph Ghoche
Assistant Professor, Architecture, Barnard College
Karen Seeley, Lecturer
Anthropology, Columbia
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak
University Professor, Columbia
Mae Ngai
Lung Family Professor of Asian American Studies, Professor of History, Columbia
Michael Harris
Professor of Mathematics, Columbia
Marianne Hirsch
William Peterfield Tretn Professor Emerita, English and Comparative Literature, Institute for the Study of Sexuality and Gender, Columbia
Mahmood Mamdani
Herbert Lehman Professor of Government, Columbia
Neferti Tadiar
Professor, Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, Barnard College
Bruno Bosteels
Professor, Latin American and Iberian Cultures, Columbia
Nico Baumbach
Associate Professor of Film and Media Studies, School of the Arts, Columbia
Susan Bernofsky
Professor of Writing, Columbia School of the Arts, Columbia
Victoria de Grazia
Moore Collegiate Professor Emerita, Department of History, Columbia
Shelly Silver
Professor, Visual Arts, School of the Arts, Columbia
Frank Guridy
Dr. Kenneth and Kareitha Forde Professor of African American and African Diaspora Studies, Columbia
Zainab Bahrani
Edith Porada Professor Art History and Archaeology, Columbia
Susan S. Witte
Professor, School of Social Work, Columbia
Karen Van Dyck
Kimon A. Doukas Professor of Modern Greek Literature, Columbia
Najam Haider
Professor of Religion, Barnard College
Avinoam Shalem
Riggio Professor, Arts of Islam, Art History and Archaeology, Columbia
Christia Mercer
Gustave M. Berne Professor of Philosophy, Columbia
Catherine Fennell
Associate Professor, Anthropology, Columbia
Kadambari Baxi
Professor of Professional Practice, Barnard + Columbia Architecture
Reinhold Martin
Professor of Architecture, GSAPP, Columbia
Sheldon Pollock
Raghunathan Professor Emeritus, Arts and Sciences, Columbia
Robert Gooding-Williams
M. Moran Weston/Black Alumni Council Professor of African American Studies and Professor of Philosophy and of African American and African Diaspora Studies, Columbia
Partha Chatterjee
Professor Emeritus of Anthropology and MESAAS, Columbia
Mana Kia
Associate Professor, MESAAS, Columbia
Katharina Pistor
Edwin B. Parker Professor of Comparative Law, Columbia Law School
Martha Howell
Miriam Champion Professor of History, Emerita, Columbia University Arts and Sciences
Elizabeth Hutchinson
Associate Professor of Art History, Barnard College
Madeleine Dobie
Professor of French & Comparative Literature, Columbia
Natasha Lightfoot
Associate Professor, History, Columbia
Brian Boyd
Senior Lecturer in Anthropology & Co-Director of the Center for Palestine Studies, Columbia
David Scott
Department of Anthropology, Columbia
Bette Gordon
Professor, School of the Arts/Film
Lila Abu-Lughod
Anthropology, Columbia
Yannik Thiem
Department of Religion, Columbia
Debbie Becher
Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Barnard College
Nadia Abu El-Haj
Anthropology, Barnard College
Barbara J. Fields
William R. Shepherd Professor of History, Columbia
Shayoni Mitr
Senior Lecturer, Department of Theatre, Barnard College
Josh Whitford
Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, Columbia
Celia Naylor
Professor, Africana Studies and History Departments, Barnard College
Teresa Sharpe
Senior Lecturer, Sociology, Columbia
Gauri Viswanathan
Class of 1933 Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Pablo Piccato
Professor of History, Columbia
Hannah Chazin
Assistant Professor, Anthropology, Columbia
Nara Milanich
Professor, History, Barnard College
Manijeh Moradian
Assistant Professor, WGSS, Barnard College
Adam Reich
Associate Professor, Columbia Sociology
Gregory Mann
Professor, History, Columbia
Mary McLeod
Professor of Architecture, Columbia
Joseph Slaughter
Associate Professor, English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Jennifer Wenzel
Professor, English & Comparative Literature and MESAAS, Columbia
Lydia H. Liu
Wun Tsun Tam Professor in the Humanities, Columbia
Hiba Bou Akar
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia
Jean Howard
George Delacorte Professor in the Humanities, Emerita, Columbia
Sarah Haley
Associate Professor of Gender Studies and History, Columbia
Richard Peña
Professor of Film and Media Studies, Columbia
D. Max Moerman
Professor, Asian and Middle Eastern Cultures, Barnard College
Stathis Gourgouris
Professor of Classics, English, Comparative Literature & Society, Columbia
Bruce Robbins
English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Anupama Rao
History, Barnard College
Anooradha Iyer Siddiqi
Assistant Professor, Architecture, Barnard College
Jonathan Crary
Meyer Schapiro Professor of Modern Art and Theory, Art History, Columbia
Rebecca Jordan-Young
Ann Whitney Olin Professor of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, Barnard College
Gregory M. Pflugfelder
Associate Professor of Japanese History, Columbia
Tey Meadow
Associate Professor of Sociology, Columbia
Seth J. Prins
Assistant Professor of Epidemiology and Sociomedical Sciences
Elizabeth Bernstein
Professor and Chair, WGSS and Professor of Sociology, Barnard College
Wael Hallaq
Avalon Foundation Professor in the Humanities, Columbia
Jo Ann Cavallo
Professor and Chair, Italian, Columbia
Zoë Crossland
Professor of Anthropology, Columbia
Paige West
Claire Tow Professor of Anthropology, Barnard College and Columbia University
Gregory Mann
Professor, History, Columbia
Paul Chamberlin
Associate Professor, History, Columbia
Joseph Albernaz
Assistant Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Lien-Hang Nguyen
Dorothy Borg Associate Professor, History, Columbia
Marisa Solomon
Assistant Professor, Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies, Barnard College
Bernard E. Harcourt
Isidor and Seville Sulzbacher Professor, Columbia Law School
Vanessa Agard-Jones
Anthropology, Columbia University
Nina Berman
Professor, Columbia Journalism School
Brent Hayes Edwards
Peng Family Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Jafari Sinclaire Allen
Professor of African American and African Diaspora Studies, Columbia
Hamid Dabashi
Hagop Kevorkian Professor of Iranian Studies and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Adam Tooze
Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of History, Columbia
Alberto Medina
Professor, LAIC, Columbia
Emanuel Admassu
Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia
Glenn Mitoma
Lecturer in the Discipline, Institute for the Study of Human Rights, Columbia
Louisa Gilbert
Professor School of Social Work, Columbia
Wayne Proudfoot
Professor Emeritus, Religion, Columbia
David Rosner
Co-Director, Center for the History & Ethics of Public Health, Columbia
Elizabeth A. Povinelli
Franz Boas Professor of Anthropology & Gender Studies, Columbia
Ashraf Ahmed
Associate Professor, Columbia Law School
Jackie Dugard
Senior Lecturer, ISHR, Columbia
Amelia Herbert
Assistant Professor, Education and Urban Studies, Barnard College
Patricia Dailey
Associate Professor of English and Comparative Literature, Columbia
Alex Watson
Lecturer, Barnard College
Mabel O. Wilson
Architecture, GSAPP and Department of African American and African Diaspora Studies, Columbia
Tom Slater
Professor of Urban Planning, Columbia
Kim Phillips-Fein
Professor of History, Columbia
Joseph A. Howley
Associate Professor of Classics and Paul Brooke Program Chair for Literature Humanities, Columbia
Walter Frisch
Gumm/von Tilzer Professor of Music, Columbia
James Yeh
Adjunct Assistant Professor, School of the Arts, Columbia
Marc Van De Mieroop
Miriam Champion Professor of History, Columbia University Arts and Sciences
Timothy Mitchell
Professor, MESAAS, Columbia
Bahia Munem
Lecturer Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race (CSER)
Camille Robcis
Professor of French & History, Columbia
Tom Kalin
Professor of Professional Practice, Film Program, Columbia
Hugo Sarmiento
Assistant Professor, Urban Planning GSAPP, Columbia
Claudio Lomnitz
Professor of Anthropology, Columbia
Nina Berman
Professor, Columbia Journalism School
Thea Renda Abu El-Haj
Professor of Education, Barnard College
Harold Stolper
Lecturer, School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia
J. Blake Turner, Ph.D.
Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia
Helen Benedict
Professor, Columbia Journalism School
Samuel Kelton Roberts
History, Sociomedical Sciences, & AAADS, Columbia
Ayten Gundogdu
Associate Professor of Political Science, Barnard College
Asim Ansari
Professor, Columbia Business School
Katryn Evinson, Ph.D.
Core Lecturer, Columbia
Nina Alvarez
Assistant Professor, Columbia Journalism School
Frederik Denef
Professor of Physics, Columbia
Kamel Jedidi
Professor of Business, Columbia Business School
Daniel Malinsky, PhD
Assistant Professor, Department of Biostatistics, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia
Sharon Schwartz
Professor of Epidemiology, Columbia
Joseph Massad
Professor, MESAAS, Columbia
A. Kayum Ahmed
Assistant Professor, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health
Marwa Elshakry
History, Columbia
Marcus Folch
Associate Professor of Classics, Columbia
Victoria Frye
Professor, School of Social Work, Columbia
Kristele Younes
Lecturer in Humanitarian Policy and Practice, Columbia
Joanne Bauer
Adjunct Professor, SIPA, Columbia
Daniel Naujoks
Lecturer in International and Public Affairs, Director, International Organization and UN Studies, School of International and Public Affairs (SIPA), Columbia
Aftab Ahmad
Senior Lecturer, Hindi-Urdu, MESAAS, Columbia
Nora Gross
Assistant Professor of Education, Barnard College
Prantik Saha, MD MPH
Assistant Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, Vagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons, Columbia University Irving Medical Center
Christine Marrewa
Lecturer in South Asian Studies, Middle Eastern, South Asian, and African Studies, Columbia
Sabrina Hermosilla
Assistant Professor, Heilbrunn Department on Population and Family Health, Columbia
Jeffrey Fagan
Isidor & Seville Sulzbacher Professor of Law, Columbia
++++
George Friedman Is Correct - 1973 Does Not Equate With 2024.
As between Biden and Trump, there is no question America would be in better hands if Trump wins.
There is a mounting surge from reliable sources, Biden will either resign or the Democrat powers that be will replace him. Stay tuned because the due date is either before and/or no later than August 18th.
I suspect either way, the Chicago Convention will be a riotous disaster.
Meanwhile, George Friedman recently wrote an excellent analysis of the Israeli-Hamas war, entitled: ("For the US, 2024 Isn’t 1973.") I believe his viewpoint happens to be correct and this is why the war must pivot from Hamas, if it can, and engulf Iran which is the true villain.
This is another reason why Trump must be elected over Biden. I believe Trump is far more practical and freer to act because his presidential legacy is more susceptible/dependent upon history than politics.
There is a mounting surge from reliable sources, Biden will either resign or the Democrat powers that be will replace him. Stay tuned because the due date is either before and/or no later than August 18th.
I suspect either way, the Chicago Convention will be a riotous disaster.
Meanwhile, George Friedman recently wrote an excellent analysis of the Israeli-Hamas war, entitled: ("For the US, 2024 Isn’t 1973.") I believe his viewpoint happens to be correct and this is why the war must pivot from Hamas, if it can, and engulf Iran which is the true villain.
This is another reason why Trump must be elected over Biden. I believe Trump is far more practical and freer to act because his presidential legacy is more susceptible/dependent upon history than politics.
In his essay, Friedman points out, 'Deep in the Israeli psyche is the notion America will not abandon Israel in extremis' . However, Friedman reminds us, nations have no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interests. In 1973, Israel's interest was to protect the whole of Israel – and that was absolute. The U.S. had what one might call a sentimental interest in Israel, but building a strategy based on sentiment is dangerous. What really mattered to Washington,. in 1973,. was fear of the Soviet Union controlling The Suez Canal and Syria's oil. Friedman does not concur 1973 and 2024 equate.' Friedman, therefore, is of the view Israel's current military belief remains shaped by October, 1973.
This could prove a tragic miscalculation, particularly because of Biden's desire to be re-elected. Why? Because the United States, under Biden, may not want to wage a political and financially expensive undertaking. Furthermore, the war in 1973 lasted a few weeks, whereas the Hamas War seems to have no end. Again why? Because the Hamas War is different, and a decisive battle is hard to imagine. How does one end, a war, a concept based on hatred and Islamist terror?
What the two wars have in common is a massive intelligence failure. Even a defeat of Hamas leadership only sets the stage for the next war, and Israel must deal with the possibility of the next intelligence failure. Furthermore, recruitment of Israel ihating Palestinians is a foregone certainty.
The IDF and IAF are fighting under highly constrained circumstances, plus an imposed Biden strategy complicated by hordes of Palestinian refugees which restrains their ability to be effective militarily. Israel faces a very long path and a dangerous one. This is not 1973.
Iran must become the ultimate target and there is no available evidence to suggest Biden has the stomach to challenge what Obama did by circumventing the Senate and declaring his presidential order an "agreement."
This could prove a tragic miscalculation, particularly because of Biden's desire to be re-elected. Why? Because the United States, under Biden, may not want to wage a political and financially expensive undertaking. Furthermore, the war in 1973 lasted a few weeks, whereas the Hamas War seems to have no end. Again why? Because the Hamas War is different, and a decisive battle is hard to imagine. How does one end, a war, a concept based on hatred and Islamist terror?
What the two wars have in common is a massive intelligence failure. Even a defeat of Hamas leadership only sets the stage for the next war, and Israel must deal with the possibility of the next intelligence failure. Furthermore, recruitment of Israel ihating Palestinians is a foregone certainty.
The IDF and IAF are fighting under highly constrained circumstances, plus an imposed Biden strategy complicated by hordes of Palestinian refugees which restrains their ability to be effective militarily. Israel faces a very long path and a dangerous one. This is not 1973.
Iran must become the ultimate target and there is no available evidence to suggest Biden has the stomach to challenge what Obama did by circumventing the Senate and declaring his presidential order an "agreement."
+++
++++
I never practiced law though I did graduate, made Law Review and had a Case note cited by a judge.
That said, it is my uninformed opinion Congress can and must pass legislation, with respect to presidential immunity, that stipulates only SCOTUS can determine whether any president is guilty of breaking a criminal law during their term in office and the president need not have been impeached before the issue reaches SCOTUS.
Breaking a criminal law is one thing but being free of prosecution for legitimate presidential actions and responsibilities is a wholly different matter and all presidents must be free of such incumbrances.
++++
No comments:
Post a Comment