Trump has been accused of calling the Israeli Prime Minister to discuss a possible ceasefire deal with Hamas.

Donald Trump has been accused of violating federal law by allegedly calling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the ceasefire deal the U.S. is helping negotiate between Israel and Hamas.

The former president allegedly made the call on August 14, according to Axios, which cited two unnamed “U.S. sources who were briefed on the call.”

…

If Trump did make the call, he would potentially be breaking the law as the Logan Act, enacted in 1799, prohibits unauthorized private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments on behalf of the U.S.

American Muckrakers, an organization that states it seeks to hold politicians and officials accountable, has filed a request with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of State.

  • Takios@discuss.tchncs.de
    0·
    6 months ago

    If laws applied to Trump, he’d have been put into jail a long time ago. Alas, he is still a free man, free to commit crimes as he wishes.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    perfect call, it was perfect… everybody says so. it’s actually way, way better than perfect, way higher than 100 percent perfection…

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      I’m certain once they’re done screeching about how awful the Dems are in today’s Dem threads, they will then make time to screech in this one. Right?

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      A certain someone complains constantly that they’re censored by “Zionists” but even calling them out for their bad faith bs will often get your comments removed…

    • darharrison@lemm.ee
      0·
      6 months ago

      “Well, the nickname is Genocide Joe, not Genocide Don, so obviously it’s Biden’s fault that Trump is sabotaging the ceasefire deals!”

    • pezhore@lemmy.ml
      0·
      6 months ago

      See, this is 4th dimensional chess. Trump knows that Bidens deal would be bad for Palestine and only Trump can get a better one. So akshually this is a good thing. /s

    • MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      I think one of them went with “it’s an unconfirmed report, not a transcript of the call” or some other weasel-y bullshit like that.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the self-proclaimed party of law and order would see that Trump ends up in prison where he belongs - and not in the white house?

    • aquinteros@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      what infuriates me is that eventually if he ends up in prison one way or another, they will all negate even knowing the guy, and act all ignorant of all the atrocities. the same happended here in chile with our dictator and people to this day defend him. one of the biggest defender of the dictator is going to run for president next year and to this day hasn’t recognized her role in the civil - military dictatorship that killed and imprisoned thousands of Chileans… really they act as if it never happened. it will be the same after good ol don is dead or in prison

  • frezik@midwest.social
    0·
    6 months ago

    Of all the stuff Trump is accused and/or convicted of, this is the most not happening. More not happening than the Cannon case, because there’s at least a good possibility she gets removed.

    The Logan Act was passed by the first Adams Administration, it has only been prosecuted twice, and both were acquitted. Even a normal Supreme Court would probably strike down the law on First Amendment grounds. The slobbering wingnut Supreme Court we have now certainly would when Trump is involved.

    That all said, should voters put up with the idea that Trump is trying to fuck with the election by having Bibi continue a genocide? No, they absolutely should not.

    • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
      0·
      6 months ago

      The first amendment has some pretty solid limitations. Someone could argue they don’t apply here, but I don’t think that would hold. Any constitutional lawyers have a take on this?

      That said, the likelihood that he’s convicted of it, sentenced, without a stay, where he sits a day in jail is sooooo slim that it’s practically two dimensional. As you said, there are barriers and interference everywhere, and he’s the king of stalling lawsuits.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        0·
        6 months ago

        Call it a national security concern and gitmo his ass as an official presidential act he couldn’t ever be prosecuted for.

        • ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world
          0·
          6 months ago

          Yes, he’s been meeting with the leaders across the world. There’s no way they weren’t discussing the conflicts with which they are involved. I felt particularly betrayed by Volodymyr Zelenskyy meeting with Trump. If that wasn’t a sting to catch Trump in the act that was in trade for more arms and supplies, I’m angry.

  • someguy3@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    The former president allegedly made the call on August 14, according to Axios, which cited two unnamed “U.S. sources who were briefed on the call.”

    The next day, however, Netanyahu’s office denied that the call took place.

  • vegeta@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    FTFY Donald Trump Accused of Commitedting commited ‘Massive Crime’ With Reported Phone Call

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      0·
      6 months ago

      Donald Trump Accused of Commitedting commited ‘Massive Crime’ With Reported Phone Call Again.

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        0·
        6 months ago

        You don’t need to cross off phone for that one. There have been a couple high profile crimes on the phone and who knows how many others.

      • snooggums@midwest.socialEnglish
        0·
        6 months ago

        I look forward to him receiving absolutely zero consequences because why would anything he did ever result in the slightest inconvenience for him?

        I don’t believe in god, but Trump makes me think that crossroads demons could be real.

  • Fuzzy_Dunlop@lemm.ee
    0·
    6 months ago

    If I understand the actual text of the law, it only refers to disputes that directly involve the U.S. This dispute does not. (Sure, the U.S. is indirectly involved, but we’re at least indirectly involved with everything.)

    Yes, it would be stupid for him to involve himself, but Trump has done enough illegal shit that we don’t need to go looking for more.

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Good

    This means hell run the whole, “Only I had the balls to blah blah blah”

    And if the democrats want to continue their strong run, they’ll have to be on top of action toward it as well. He’s a useful idiot sometimes.

  • tetrachromacy@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    Republicans and ratfucking peace talks during an inhumane war of territorial expansion to make their political opponent look bad. Name a more iconic duo.

  • EnderWiggin@lemmy.world
    0·
    6 months ago

    As usual, barely any mention of it in the news. Standard procedure for Republicans, just like Nixon and Reagan.