So @JonathanTurley uses the *insane* phrase "never been used successfully to convict"—a phrase I never saw when I was practicing—to avoid saying "multiple people have been indicted for Logan Act violations and Congress had 221 years to say 'this isn't good law' and chose not to."
PS/ Those who don't know much about law might actually BELIEVE in the fairyland Turley and his right-wing peers have established—in which every prosecutor in every case makes an idiosyncratic assessment as to whether a statute is constitutional. Never been a thing, never will be.
PS2/ I wish Turley had the integrity to *just* argue that the Logan Act should *now* be repealed, largely because when you actually know what the Act is intended to *prevent*, you understand that those who want it repealed—not amended—simply no longer want to live in a democracy.
PS3/ What I think most of us want to hear from Jonathan Turley is an hours-long log-cabin-style ghost story about the *hundreds* of valiant efforts Republicans made over the last 221 years to repeal the Logan Act (*before* it became inconvenient to them). Oh—there were none? Odd.
