Pelosi should be prosecuted...

POSTED BY: Hero
UPDATED: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 16:30
VIEWED: 9691
PAGE 1 of 1

HERO

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:13 PM

The Wall Street Journal has correctly pointed out the following from the Logan Act (passed in 1799 and last amended in 1994):

Quote:

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

She broke the law and should at the least resign her seat.

The key here is that the President specifically told her not to do what she did. Other folk who have done similar stunts, like Carter going to Korea, do so with either the administrations's approval or at least its ignoring of the trip. Here Pelosi deliberaty treated with a foriegn power against the express wishes of the President and intent on creating a new foriegn policy not just for this country, but for Isreal as well.

H

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:16 PM

Along with U.S. House members Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt.

"'U.S. House members ... including Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt' met with Assad on April 1, (before Pelosi) saying 'they believed there was an opportunity for dialogue with the Syrian leadership.'"
http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200704050004

ERIC

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:28 PM

Quote:

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

One of the 9/11 hijackers was Lebanese. Lebanon was at the time, and to a certain extent still is, an agent or subject of Syria. The case can be made that the diplomacy by the leader of the House is aimed at improving relations to the end of redressing the injury and preventing further injury.

DAYVE

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:32 PM

And this:

Pitts in Syria before Pelosi_But county’s U.S. rep. draws less criticism__By Dave Pidgeon, Staff_Intelligencer Journal
http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/202433

Published: Apr 03, 2007 1:43 AM EST

LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - While U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's upcoming visit to Syria has caused the White House to bristle, a little-publicized rendezvous took place Sunday between Syria's president and Lancaster County's congressman.

And though Bush administration officials have been criticizing Pelosi, it's not clear what role the White House and the U.S. Department of State played when U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts and two other Republican congressmen met with Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Pitts is a Chester County Republican who represents Lancaster County.

Gabe Neville, Pitts' chief of staff, said Monday the conference between Assad and the three Republicans was intended to be "low profile."

"It was done in cooperation with the administration," he said.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:58 PM

...and that Republican Issa guy mentioned in the other thread. Him, too?

And she accomplished SO MUCH while she was there-- probably incited the next 9/11 attack.

But that's OK-- this is handy- now the right wingers can hang the " Nancy the Traitor " sign around her neck for the rest of her career.

And she associated with *S*Y*R*I*A*N*S-- terrorists. Their evil influence and opposition to right thinking, good American values might cause her to try to end the War in Iraq, or maybe not support the troops.

( Oh yeah, that was happening already. )

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:06 PM

This is so far off the wall and mis-directed at first I thought it was ironic. Because, well, everything you said about Pelosi can also be said about repubicans, and, well - they did it first! Then I realized it was serious. DUDE -

SHINYED

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:39 PM

Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity or problems from anybody. It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:59 PM

I'm just saying if you want to prosecute Pelosi you have to prosecute everybody who did the same thing (oh, and who happened to do it first, but without the outcry from people like you ). Don't know how that make repubicans especially picked-on.

SHINYED

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:04 PM

Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

SHINYED

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:12 PM

Personally, I'd love to see a steel-cage brawl between Pelosi & Rice....probably would be biggest pay-per-view in history. They could create pre-fight buzz by just ratcheting up the usual rhetoric & name-calling, and have it all culminate in a no-holds barred match....ooooh baby; the hair pulling, the eye scratching, the groin kicking, the swearing...it'd be a blast!...what?...OK yes Pelosi is a lot older than Rice...so let's give Pelosi a partner...a 2-to-1 tag-team event...and her partner...none other than the formidable pillar of strength and inner fortitude, the Honorable Harry Reid.

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:14 PM

What does this

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

have to do with this?

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity or problems from anybody. It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

Just trying to find a point here we can discuss, but your's seem to be all over the map.

SHINYED

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:19 PM

There's nothing to discuss... I think they're all vile assholes...all putting their personal ambitions and causes ahead of the good of the country.

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:24 PM

"they're all vile assholes" I'm wondering, does this include repubicans? I'm really curious. Your post was ambiguous.

KANEMAN

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"they're all vile assholes" I'm wondering, does this include repubicans? I'm really curious. Your post was ambiguous.

I get what he's saying. What is the problem Ruse? Is the word 'all' really that ambiguous?

SHINYED

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:45 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Your post was ambiguous.

All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:54 PM

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't know if you meant "all" democrats or "all" everybody.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

OMG, he's been reading Ann Coulter again. She wrote a column with that exact title ( and with just as little basis in fact ) about a month ago.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity

I think Shiny oughtta either go back to English class , or buy a dictionary.

" Without any impunity " the way he uses it here means the opposite of what he obviously intends.

"With impunity" means without worrying about consequences or punishment.

To quote ( directly ) Jayne Cobb, " nice Move, dumbass."

SIGNYM

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:55 PM

Quote:
Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

[ Somebody who is zero hearbeats away from the Presidency should show some respect for the Office, too.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, April 6, 2007 9:13 PM

This thread is(was)about the legality of Pelosi's actions. Instead we have posters saying 'what about the republicans' and grammer critique. Are Pelosi's actions okay with all of the responders thus far, or will you all continue to 'change the goalposts' instead of discussing the topic at hand? I guess the right and left have more in common than people think.

Posting to stir stuff up.

KANEMAN

Friday, April 6, 2007 9:24 PM

This ugly fucking American hating bitch should be hung up by her clit, slapped in her titties, and ass-fucked with the neck of a guitar...Just my opinion.....

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 10:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
This thread is(was)about the legality of Pelosi's actions.

I read the post. Pelosi was on nothing more than a fact-finding mission, not illegal by any means. But if you want to CLAIM it's illegal then you also have to look to equal application of the law. B/c applying a law unequally is illegal. So the actions of repubicans becomes relevant.

AURAPTOR

Friday, April 6, 2007 10:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I'm just saying if you want to prosecute Pelosi you have to prosecute everybody who did the same thing (oh, and who happened to do it first, but without the outcry from people like you ). Don't know how that make repubicans especially picked-on.

Only they didn't do the same thing. Pelosi was asked specifically NOT to go, and she introduced her OWN policy with a foreign nantion, contrary to that of the Presidents. It's my understanding that the GOP group that went were still touting official US policy, that of the President. If they weren't, then yes, censure them all, and possibly prosecute as well. But from what I'd heard, the 2 cases are not the same, so the actions toward them should not be the same either.

As for the claims that Pelosi et al were merely on a 'fact finding' mission, that's like saying Sandy Burger thought he was at a public library when he 'checked out' those secret documents. It's total bunk, is what it is. She was attempting to play the role of Sec of State, and envoy and dimplomat between the US, Israel and Syria. She's none of that, she's the Speaker of the House. The sooner she starts acting like that, the better.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

RUE

Friday, April 6, 2007 10:30 PM

"The tour was part of the congressional delegation's first full day in Jerusalem, the first stop on their fact-finding trip to the Middle East. The group arrived here Friday."
You seem so sure that Pelosi is doing something more than fact-finding. Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.

"BUSH: We have made it clear to high-ranking officials, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, that going to Syria sends mixed signals -- signals in the region and, of course, mixed signals to President Assad."
Republicans were also not supposed to go, despite your claim that they were an exception. Please post some link to explain your claim.

"a Republican-led delegation that met with Assad in Damascus on April 1."
Repulicans did meet with Assad despite Bush's explicit disapproval, AND they went there before Pelosi. Please explain 1) why you didn't make an issue out of it when it happened and 2) why repubicans should not be prosecuted.

MALBADINLATIN

Friday, April 6, 2007 11:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

Once again I agree ShinyEd. Both parties have betrayed thier principles and hired focus groups to find out what we want to hear, not what's right! Being in office and having fancy jets to fly around in is way more important than doing the right thing. When a Republican wins an election it means that the voters approve of that Republican's political agenda, and he or she should act within those principles. Same goes for Democrats. You know what, people like Shawn Hannity and Bill OReilly make me wanna puke every day. So I know how the dems must make you feel. The problem is simple, the Military Industrial Complex is no longer the threat. The Media Political Complex is. I could get a lot shittier today but it's Easter weekend.

Best to you and yours!

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

HERO

Saturday, April 7, 2007 12:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.

Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria with a message of peace carried on behalf of the Isreali govt. There was no such message, it was not her place to deliver it if there was.

She further offered herself as a go between for the two nations in these new peace negotiations.

Both of these acts on her part created new foriegn policy and contravened existing policy and sought to commit the United States government to a position it was not prepared to take. It was a huge blunder that was aimed at influencing our relations with both Syria and Isreal and it was done after being specifically warned against such action by the President.

Rather then send the message that the United States wanted a new direction in policy, which I believe was her intent (and bad enough it was), she has sent the message that the United States has a Speaker of the House who is ingnorant and foolish. She should resign her post if not her seat.

Edited to add: Even though she broke the Logan Act, I think that losing her position in the govt is sufficient penalty for her error.

H

RUE

Saturday, April 7, 2007 12:29 AM

"Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria with a message of peace carried on behalf of the Isreali govt. There was no such message, it was not her place to deliver it if there was.

She further offered herself as a go between for the two nations in these new peace negotiations."

I haven't been keeping up with the news. Care to post a link?

OK - here is what I got from the Jerusalem Post:

"I will send a message to the president of Syria from the families of the soldiers and from the Cohen family as well ..."

No peace dialogue here, no negotiations, no nothing.

HERO

Saturday, April 7, 2007 12:38 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I haven't been keeping up with the news. Care to post a link?

What? Its been all over the news for a week.

http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908
and
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879247562&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007
040402306.html
and here's where they took her for a ride:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OA3KBG0&show_article=1
and my favorite:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-04-04-pelosi-syria_N.htm?csp=3
4

There's tons more.

H

RUE

Saturday, April 7, 2007 12:49 AM

No silly, not opinion, I mean actual NEWS of what Pelosi DID and SAID. From the speeches I've read (various parts of her one speech to the Knesset), she touched on nothing at all but her individual feelings and the family tragedy of the soldiers.

I mean really, if you think she should be prosecuted, don't you think she should have actually, well, DONE something illegal? Or do YOU base your prosecutions on other people's opinions of what someone might do in the future?

HERO

Saturday, April 7, 2007 12:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
No silly, not opinion, I mean actual NEWS of what Pelosi DID and SAID. From the speeches I've read (various parts of her one speech to the Knesset), she touched on nothing at all but her individual feelings and the family tragedy of the soldiers.

Yeah, might want to click on all FIVE links. Take them bottom up.

H

RUE

Saturday, April 7, 2007 1:03 AM

""Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process"

Now see, when I see VERY short snippets of quotes it makes me think that all the qualifiers and caveats had been expunged, and maybe even a few important words as well. Let's take this as an example: Explaining the supposed blunder as a misunderstanding Hero said: "Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria" and "send the message that the United States wanted a new direction in policy". Cool.

So, would YOU want to be prosecuted on 12 highly selected words taken out of context? Personally, I don't think you have a case. And you're just blowing so much hot air.

SEVENPERCENT

Saturday, April 7, 2007 1:31 AM

Quote:
And you're just blowing so much hot air.

It's Hero. Nothing unusual there.

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

FREMDFIRMA

Saturday, April 7, 2007 1:53 AM

Quote:
All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

Agreed.
So why y'all get pissed at me when I point this out ?

Pelosi's an idiot, but we knew that, and my stance is to bench all these incompetents, including her, and get some REAL foreign policy folk on the job instead of politically connected nimrods like Bolton and company.

We need shysters and snake oil salesman at this point, cause that's one hell of an ugly pig we're trying to put lipstick on right about now.

And if yer gonna talk politics via cage-match, I think imma lay my bet on Jesse Ventura.. experience counts

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

RUE

Saturday, April 7, 2007 2:01 AM

Yup.

SOUPCATCHER

Saturday, April 7, 2007 2:37 AM

* footsteps approaching a sign in the road *

"Pelosi should be prosecuted..."

* hammering, nailing, assorted other busy sounds *

"Pelosi should be persecuted..."

* footsteps fading off into the sunset, whistling *

RUE

Saturday, April 7, 2007 2:51 AM

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!

So, how are you doing Soupcatcher?

..... Though I've been pondering this topic some more. All is not as it seems. I suspect it's being severely misreported in the US. If Pelosi had committed a major blunder, her speech would not have been so well-received in the Knesset. Like Gore's 'inventing' the internet, Dean's 'scream', and Chavez's sulfur speech before the UN, I'd put good money on there being no substance to this story.

Do you think there'll be any takers?

AURAPTOR

Saturday, April 7, 2007 5:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"The tour was part of the congressional delegation's first full day in Jerusalem, the first stop on their fact-finding trip to the Middle East. The group arrived here Friday."

Who wrote that line? And so what ? The fact is, Ms Pelosi relayed an alleged message from Israel to Syria, making her an diplomat by default. She's no diplomat.

Quote:
You seem so sure that Pelosi is doing something more than fact-finding. Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.
Tom Lantos specifically said they were there to present the DEMOCRATIC views on certain issues

The initiative offers Israel peace with all Arab states if it withdraws from lands seized in 1967 and allows the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in east Jerusalem. Israel has said it would only accept the proposal if some changes were made - particularly over the issue of refugees - but Arab nations have said Israel should accept it as a basis for negotiations.

"I explained to him that this can be a very important and historic proposal if he is prepared for a discussion and a dialogue and not a presentation on a take-it-or-leave-it basis," Lantos told the Associated Press. "His reaction was very positive."

Quote:
"BUSH: We have made it clear to high-ranking officials, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, that going to Syria sends mixed signals -- signals in the region and, of course, mixed signals to President Assad."
Republicans were also not supposed to go, despite your claim that they were an exception. Please post some link to explain your claim.

"a Republican-led delegation that met with Assad in Damascus on April 1."
Repulicans did meet with Assad despite Bush's explicit disapproval, AND they went there before Pelosi. Please explain 1) why you didn't make an issue out of it when it happened and 2) why repubicans should not be prosecuted.

If they did the same thing as Pelosi et al did, which is present an alternate foreign policy than that of the White House, then yes. Censure or prosecute away.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

SOUPCATCHER

Saturday, April 7, 2007 7:26 PM

Hey Rue, I'm doing pretty well. Crossing my fingers that the sun will break through the cloud cover this afternoon. There's some tantalizing snatches of clear blue in the off-white sky.

Yeah, I don't think there's much substance to this story either. I remember, back when I was a rightwinger, thinking that Speaker Gingrich going around the world talking to world leaders and directly contradicting and talking shit about executive office foreign policy was a good thing. As far as I can tell, Speaker Pelosi isn't contradicting the administration's foreign policy, because there really isn't one. So she's getting slammed for doing less than what Speaker Gingrich was praised for. Typical.

We're going to be treated to a lot of these outrages-of-the-week over the next two years. TeddySanFran did a nice post yesterday on the GOP Representative in charge of propaganda against the Democratic Party. Here's my favorite part, in reference to the manufactured "airplane controversy:"

Quote:
exerpted from http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/06/putnams-speakerair-fiction-airbr
ushed-by-wapo/
{Adam} Putnam's most famous "jump & exploit" was sounding the alarm when the new Speaker requested a giant airplane that included waterbeds, an open bar, three IMAX screens, and room for the entire San Francisco Pride Parade to march up and down the aisle bare-assed in leather chaps and feather boas. Except, of course, that SpeakerAir was, well — kinda made up. Adam Putnam later admitted to the Tampa Tribune that the truth did not matter:

They'll keep trying until they can find something that resonates (such as the Dean scream or the Gore fake quote). That's the beauty of the shit-flinging strategy, there are Republicans out there willing to crap in their hands and heave it at Speaker Pelosi and it only takes one bullseye.

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Sunday, April 8, 2007 2:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

That's the beauty of the shit-flinging strategy, there are Republicans out there willing to crap in their hands and heave it at Speaker Pelosi and it only takes one bullseye.

Sorta,
"Ye'll take the high road,
and I'll take the low road,
and I'll be in the White House
afore ye," huh?
My apologies to Bobbie Burns.

SOUPCATCHER

Sunday, April 8, 2007 6:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Sorta,
"Ye'll take the high road,
and I'll take the low road,
and I'll be in the White House
afore ye," huh?
My apologies to Bobbie Burns.

You sure that was Burns? I thought it was more of a folk song, author unknown, referring to the singer's upcoming execution (his spirit would take the low road back to Scotland while his living buddy would be taking the high - above ground - road). At least that's what the tour guide told us as we drove along the shore of Loch Lomond. Of course, like pretty much anything that any tour guide has ever uttered, it's probably best to take that with a grain of salt.

RUE

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 8:10 PM

I was thinking about this. You know, if the Democrats were smart (one can only hope), they'd investigate the hell out of Pelosi's trip. I mean in great and painful detail. With all the 'who said what to whom and when's that don't get covered in the news.

In fact, they'd investigate the hell out of every claim made by the right-wingnuts, early and often.

It would make the right-wingnuts look like the boy who cried wolf. After a while, not only would these claims not get any traction, the claimants would lose all crediility on any topic.

One can only hope.

MALBADINLATIN

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 9:59 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government

See! You're a lawyer Hero, you know of the MANY ways to interpret the law. The way this reads...it just means she can't write letters or have sex with them. And she hasn't done either of those things yet.

I'm telling ya straight up...I've been to Syria, the men there are pigs, just like in Turkey and Iraq, I've been there for extended visits too. Try to grasp this concept. Arab men don't listen to women. They will use them to neener neener George Bush, but that's it. She didn't hurt anything, nor did she accomplish anything when she was there. You've been sucked into this absolute trash about how her visit hurts us over there. It doesn't matter!

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

HERO

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 10:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
See! You're a lawyer Hero, you know of the MANY ways to interpret the law. The way this reads...it just means she can't write letters or have sex with them. And she hasn't done either of those things yet.

Intercourse, PA...home of the Amish.

I'm fairly certain that the legislative intent of the statute was not sexual relations.

As for Pelosi, she certainly bent over let the Syrians...you know and figuratively speaking and all...

H

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
Arab men don't listen to women. They will use them to neener neener George Bush, but that's it. She didn't hurt anything, nor did she accomplish anything when she was there. You've been sucked into this absolute trash about how her visit hurts us over there. It doesn't matter!

Than why was Pelosi there? It has to be more than just a taxpayer funded holiday.

Posting to stir stuff up.

RUE

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 11:42 PM

Fact-finding mission, like many others have done before and will do after.

MALBADINLATIN

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Than why was Pelosi there? It has to be more than just a taxpayer funded holiday.

When you're an extremeist (not saying you are for sure) you run the risk of missing the positive intent of your opposite. From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria, or as RUE said, "a fact finding mission". Basically getting things rolling.

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

Everyone is trying to do good here, and hey! Drum up a little good publicity for your party too?, why not.

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

HERO

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria...

Thats an argument to make in the halls of the US Congress, not in the Dictator's throne room in Damascus.

Quote:

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

Your first statement "normalizing relations" is directly contradictory to the second one you make. In essence Pelosi is substituting her foriegn policy for the President's and against his express intention.

I note for the record that Gingrich was accused, rightfully so, of the same thing. He said on a trip to Taiwan that the US would defend Taiwan. He admitted his mistake and said that such a statement, while an accurate reflection of US law was contrary to Clinton policy (which was to downplay the law and our commitment to avoid provoking a negative defensive reaction from China thereby setting back relations).

Pelosi goes beyond a mere restatement of existing US law, she created her own policy and tried to commit the United States to a particular position in regards to both Syria and Isreal.

Quote:

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

There are traditional remedies for this kind of thing. A rebuke of and apology from Pelosi (ala Gingrich). Censure. Loss of her Speakership, resignation. All are non-criminal penalties that fit this particular crime by making it less criminal and more of a lapse in judgement. I think any of these would be acceptable...unless she goes to Iran.

H

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:53 PM

Ahh yes. When Republicans do wrong all is covered by plausable deniability and spin. When Democrats do wrong we need to see punishment.

And poor little Georgie couldn't ORDER Pelosi not to go because.....?

This is all very entertaining.

Politics as usual Chrisisall

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 3:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
When you're an extremeist (not saying you are for sure) you run the risk of missing the positive intent of your opposite. From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria, or as RUE said, "a fact finding mission". Basically getting things rolling.

First Pelosi accomplished nothing with her visit, now she is getting the ball rolling. So which is it? Is she 'normalizing relations with Syria (diplomatic trip) or is she simply finding facts? And what facts is she finding? Besides Israel does not trust Syria and vice versa.

Quote:

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

That is the basis of this entire thread. Should Speaker Pelosi be going against the mandate of the present Administration?

Quote:

Everyone is trying to do good here, and hey! Drum up a little good publicity for your party too?, why not.

Just who is getting all the good publicity from this? Besides Syria that is.

Quote:

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

This thread is about the legality of Pelosi's actions. But all politicians who break the law should be dragged to court or else why have a legal system in the first place?

Posting to stir stuff up.

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Ahh yes. When Republicans do wrong all is covered by plausable deniability and spin. When Democrats do wrong we need to see punishment.

I have seen plenty of spin coming from the Democrats in this thread, your post included. (you may not personally be a Democrat but you are spinning for them)

Posting to stir stuff up.

CHRISISALL

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
(you may not personally be a Democrat but you are spinning for them)

Bush and Co. have seen to it that many died who did not need to, Pelosi (to my knowledge) has not.
Those are my politics.

Simplistic Chrisisall

RUE

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 4:38 PM

"This thread is about the legality of Pelosi's actions."

I think the one thing repubicans fear is a real investigation of this. B/c it would end up being shown as just so much hot air. If then democrats were smart, they'd get on investigating right away.

(Now watch the right wing-nuts howl over someone calling for a real investigation. How ufair ! And it's just all spin !)

MALBADINLATIN

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Quote:

First Pelosi accomplished nothing with her visit, now she is getting the ball rolling. So which is it? Is she 'normalizing relations with Syria (diplomatic trip) or is she simply finding facts? And what facts is she finding? Besides Israel does not trust Syria and vice versa.

I still believe Pelosi accomplished nothing, only because Arab men are as sexist as is possible. I was guessing of her possible intentions when I wrote of getting the ball rolling.

Quote:

That is the basis of this entire thread.

I thought it was titled Pelosi should be prosecuted? Which includes a lot of things. Nothing I wrote was out of the scope of this thread. And my last paragraph about all polticians breaking the law means that not just Dem's are doing it, Republicans too.

Quote:

Just who is getting all the good publicity from this? Besides Syria that is.

Pelosi is getting good pub within her party and the administration. That's an added benefit. Wake up! She is a politician just like Bush.
Quote:

This thread is about the legality of Pelosi's actions. But all politicians who break the law should be dragged to court or else why have a legal system in the first place?

Presecuting them is next to impossible, both sides have great lawyers!

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

GEEZER

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
What? Its been all over the news for a week.

...and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007
040402306.html

What was interesting to me was the harsh criticism in the Washington Post Editorial. This is not from a guest columnnist, but is the Post's house editorial opinion. Hardly Right-wing nuts.

Quote:
Pratfall in Damascus
Nancy Pelosi's foolish shuttle diplomacy
Thursday, April 5, 2007; Page A16

HOUSE SPEAKER Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered an excellent demonstration yesterday of why members of Congress should not attempt to supplant the secretary of state when traveling abroad. After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process" as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. "We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria," she said.

Only one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message. "What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel," said a statement quickly issued by the prime minister's office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel." In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda.

Ms. Pelosi was criticized by President Bush for visiting Damascus at a time when the administration -- rightly or wrongly -- has frozen high-level contacts with Syria. Mr. Bush said that thanks to the speaker's freelancing Mr. Assad was getting mixed messages from the United States. Ms. Pelosi responded by pointing out that Republican congressmen had visited Syria without drawing presidential censure. That's true enough -- but those other congressmen didn't try to introduce a new U.S. diplomatic initiative in the Middle East. "We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace," Ms. Pelosi grandly declared.

Never mind that that statement is ludicrous: As any diplomat with knowledge of the region could have told Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Assad is a corrupt thug whose overriding priority at the moment is not peace with Israel but heading off U.N. charges that he orchestrated the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri. The really striking development here is the attempt by a Democratic congressional leader to substitute her own foreign policy for that of a sitting Republican president. Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush's military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.

Not much equivocation there. When the Washington Post calls the actions of a Democratic Speaker of the House "ludicrous", "counterproductive", and "foolish", and notes that "In other words, Ms. Pelosi not only misrepresented Israel's position but was virtually alone in failing to discern that Mr. Assad's words were mere propaganda", you gotta figure that, even if she didn't break any laws, she F'ed up pretty bad.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Sorta,
"Ye'll take the high road,
and I'll take the low road,
and I'll be in the White House
afore ye," huh?
My apologies to Bobbie Burns.

You sure that was Burns? I thought it was more of a folk song, author unknown

It's stuck in my head as related to Robert Burns. I wouldn't argue with anybody who says it wasn't his. Fact I looked it up on Wikipedia, they said it was first reported in 1841. Burns is associated in my mind with the Romantic period, usually about 1810 to 1825, so that makes this somewhat later.

Been a long time since I studied English Lit, could very well be the topic was Robert Burns and the Scottish Romantic Poest or something like that.

SHINYED

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:18 PM

I don't like Polly Pelosi, but I do give her credit for having courage of her convictions, and inner strength to stand toe to toe with the 'ole boy's club of political power.

Whether or not she accomplished anything with her visit remains to be seen. I do know that Madcow Albright went to Syria 8 times during her dismal term, and all she ever accomplished was to give the vile Syrians an endless supply of jokes and demented sexual fantasies. Maybe Pelosi did better....As far as going against George Bush on this, that pattern was established many years ago when 3 Dem. Congressmen...Conyers, McDermott & ?? went to visit Saddam in Iraq right before we invaded, and called Bush a liar in front of the whole world. Why they all weren't arrested on the spot when they returned to America is still a big mystery to me...well not really...'cause AG Ashcroft was a total tool and buffoon, and wouldn't recognize treason & sedition if it bit him in the nuts.

FLETCH2

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 8:31 PM

Well she wouldn't be a politician if she didn't want to meddle in things.

GEEZER

Thursday, April 12, 2007 3:15 AM

No one has a problem with the Washington Post criticism of Pelosi?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

FLETCH2

Thursday, April 12, 2007 1:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
No one has a problem with the Washington Post criticism of Pelosi?

Do you mean with what they said or the fact they said anything?

All politico's grandstand, either for their constituents and the media. If you like them then you defend their actions or see some merit in them, if you dont then you tend to smell the hypocracy. Is your congressman's "fact finding" trip to Bagdad a sign of a go forward legislator or a way to generate great shots for his re-election commercials? Depending on why you stand on him determines what you see.

Pelosi's trip did nothing. It is a none event in the same way that all these other trips by politico's of both types have done nothing. If you like her then this is a sign she's "doing something" if you don't it's her mugging for a photo-op.

GEEZER

Thursday, April 12, 2007 1:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
No one has a problem with the Washington Post criticism of Pelosi?

Do you mean with what they said or the fact they said anything?

I mean the fact that one of the leading liberal papers in the US found it necessary to criticise her trip so forcefully. This is pretty harsh talk about a Democrat from a paper which usually praises anything they do. It seems that the Post at least recognises that foreign policy is the responsibility of the Executive Branch.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

FIVVER

Thursday, April 12, 2007 1:39 PM

Geezeer, I have no problem with it. For once they got it right. Personally I hope she and Lantos go to Iran. That would be a lovely time for W to hit their nuclear facilities.

FLETCH2

Thursday, April 12, 2007 2:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:

I mean the fact that one of the leading liberal papers in the US found it necessary to criticise her trip so forcefully. This is pretty harsh talk about a Democrat from a paper which usually praises anything they do. It seems that the Post at least recognises that foreign policy is the responsibility of the Executive Branch.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

I think they see it as a miss step. I true friend tells you when you are screwing up.

RUE

Thursday, April 12, 2007 6:54 PM

The Washington Post one of the "leading liberal papers in the US" ????

Now I've heard it all. Jeez.

GEEZER

Thursday, April 12, 2007 9:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
The Washington Post one of the "leading liberal papers in the US" ????

Now I've heard it all. Jeez.

You ever read it, or is this just knee-jerk because they dared to suggest that Rep. Pelosi was overstepping her bounds by trying to conduct foreign policy? Maybe you could give some reason you disagree with just about everyone's opinion of the Post?

"Keep the Shiny side up"

RUE

Thursday, April 12, 2007 11:39 PM

By 'everybody' do you mean you?

Yes, I read it probably 5 days a week, along with the NYTimes, LATimes, Drudge, Townhall, FamilyVoices, the BBC and a large selection left right and center, US and foreign.

The Washington Post is US right of center.

GEEZER

Friday, April 13, 2007 1:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:

The Washington Post is US right of center.

Bullshit. Provide any evidence that this is true. Any indication that the Post supports any right-wing policies. Any indication that they oppose liberal policies.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

RUE

Friday, April 13, 2007 2:34 AM

"I mean the fact that one of the leading liberal papers"

Hey, you made the claim, you back it up.

GEEZER

Friday, April 13, 2007 11:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"I mean the fact that one of the leading liberal papers"

Hey, you made the claim, you back it up.

Nah. Let's not go there. Whatever I cite, you'll say "that's not what I mean by Liberal", and we'll continue to avoid the point of this thread, which is that Sen. Pelosi overstepped her bounds by trying to unilaterally implement foreign policy - a role reserved for the Executive Branch.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

RUE

Saturday, April 14, 2007 1:35 PM

Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I keep saying the democrats should investigate the hell out of this and any right wing-nut complaint. But rather than respond to that you'll just backtrack to a different version.

So now I'm guessing you have a problem with this being investigated. You must really love your empty. bankrupt. dishonest. claims.

GEEZER

Saturday, April 14, 2007 1:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I keep saying the democrats should investigate the hell out of this and any right wing-nut complaint. But rather than respond to that you'll just backtrack to a different version.

So now I'm guessing you have a problem with this being investigated. You must really love your empty. bankrupt. dishonest. claims.

Investigate away. Seems to be sufficient evidence to at least suggest that Sen. Pelosi acted out of bounds. But rather than just the Democrats investigating, I'd prefer either the relevent committee or a Special Prosecutor, to allow for bi-partisan review. And at the end we get a definitive answer.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, December 10, 2021 10:44 PM

Nancy Pelosi says she will 'never forgive' Trump for his role in the January 6 Capitol attack for the trauma he inflicted on Hill staff
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10289425/Pelosi-says-never-fo
rgive-Trump-role-January-6-Capitol-attack.html

NANCY Pelosi loses her MIND ON NATIONAL TV
https://rumble.com/vqinse-nancy-pelosi-loses-her-mind-on-national-tv.h
tml

Meadows Sues Pelosi, Jan. 6 Committee Hours After Panel Announces Criminal Contempt Plan
https://www.ibtimes.com/meadows-sues-pelosi-jan-6-committee-hours-afte
r-panel-announces-criminal-contempt-3354298

6IXSTRINGJACK

Saturday, December 11, 2021 4:17 AM

Fuck Nancy Pelosi.

--------------------------------------------------

Vaccinated People: "You need to get muh vaccination shots that don't work because I got muh vaccination shots that don't work and I'm afraid of people that didn't get muh vaccination shots that don't work because muh vaccination shots that don't work don't work."

JAYNEZTOWN

Friday, June 10, 2022 8:25 PM

Paul Pelosi DUI arrest: Napa County DA's office refuses to release body cam footage during investigation

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-pelosi-dui-arrest-body-cam-foota
ge-refuse-release

JAYNEZTOWN

Tuesday, November 15, 2022 4:30 PM

Biden to Pelosi: 'I Hope You Stick'

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/14/biden-pelosi-house-midterm-re
sults-00066844