Pelosi broke the law visiting Damascus

[ballz2wallz]

So it seems Nancy Pelosi, in her trip to Damascus, Syria to visit al-Assad, actually broke the law. She committed a felony according the the Logan Act, which states:

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.

It's not like she was honest on her trip anyway.

Inaction.

[six6ftr]

So does that mean the republicans that went days prior broke the law too?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by six6ftr

So does that mean the republicans that went days prior broke the law too?

If it was against the president's wishes, yes.

[six6ftr]

It is good to see that you are not one-sided in this issue. That is a good thing. Now back to the matter at hand. I think not having dialogue with your so called enemies is a mistake. You have to know your enemy and the best way to do that is to talk to them. If they are willing to talk, then what harm can come out of it?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by six6ftr

It is good to see that you are not one-sided in this issue. That is a good thing. Now back to the matter at hand. I think not having dialogue with your so called enemies is a mistake. You have to know your enemy and the best way to do that is to talk to them. If they are willing to talk, then what harm can come out of it?

I never was two-sided. In fact, I posted yesterday that we should be more angry at the Republican congressmen that went over, as this is something expected of Pelosi.

As far as the debate of whether or not we should talk to our enemies is concerned, that is not the issue. Some think we should, some think we shouldn't. The issue at hand however is that she went over there against the President's wishes, and she broke the law doing so. Will you justify her breaking the law because you think the President should be talking to our enemies anyway?

[six6ftr]

Well that is a hard question me for me because politically she is not justified in my eyes. But personally since I am not a fan of the president due to his lack of leadership skills, he needs others to correct his mistakes. But to answer your question, yes she is wrong for going and so are the other three republicans.

[grembert]

This trip creates a PR problem for Pelosi, but she will swear that she was not trying to influence the Syrian government, and the trip would then not be illegal.

Many Americans are cheering her on, wanting any kind of change in direction in the Middle East.

I am surprised that many conservatives in this forum don't realize that all these kinds of events make it harder for the Republicans to make a good showing in the 2008 elections -- check the polls !

[BigRob]

Originally Posted by six6ftr

So does that mean the republicans that went days prior broke the law too?

It depends.

Pelosi had said she was bringing messages of peace on the behalf of Isreal. That meant she was acting at a diplomatic level which is a big no-no. After all, we can't just have every elected official say they are representing us in a diplomatic fashion and trying to influence other nations just because they feel like it. Those matters are the job of the Sec. of State.

That said,as I understand it, if any of the other people there (Rep. included) tried to influence others diplomatically, then they are guilty. But if they were there "unofficially" (I believe on of the guys is from Lebenon and visits family there anyway) then they were not guilty of anything.

Pelosi's problem is she admitted to be bringing a message from Isreal. By doing that she admitted to a crime. And for what it's worth, Isreal is denying telling her to say anything.

[grembert]

Everything considered, it was probably not a good thing for Pelosi to do.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by grembert

Everything considered, it was probably not a good thing for Pelosi to do.

I agree. If she had gone there just to talk I would be against it, but I'm completely against it when she decided to be a spokesperson for countries like Israel regarding a middle eastern conflict. That's way out of her job description and clearly a stunt.

If a sensible Democrat had gone to talk I'd be more ok with it. But, Pelosi has proven to not be so. So I would be against her going the same as I'd be against a radical Republican going to speak to leaders in the middle east... especially if they went with the intention of being a spokesperson and spreading messages of diplomacy. That's not their job. Based on the definition of the law provided here I would say she broke the law. Not sure if I think she should be prosecuted though.

This is just yet another reason to think poorly of Pelosi.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

I agree. If she had gone there just to talk I would be against it, but I'm completely against it when she decided to be a spokesperson for countries like Israel regarding a middle eastern conflict. That's way out of her job description and clearly a stunt.

If a sensible Democrat had gone to talk I'd be more ok with it. But, Pelosi has proven to not be so. So I would be against her going the same as I'd be against a radical Republican going to speak to leaders in the middle east... especially if they went with the intention of being a spokesperson and spreading messages of diplomacy. That's not their job. Based on the definition of the law provided here I would say she broke the law. Not sure if I think she should be prosecuted though.

This is just yet another reason to think poorly of Pelosi.

If you have a list of horrible things Pelosi has done since she became minority leader a few months ago, you can make a new thread and I'd be happy to debunk them

I have much more respect for Baker who was passionate, "Flip Syria!" was his famous quote he'd say at the end of interviews, long after 99% of americans forget about this (haven't they already?) Syria will again be considered by the next administration, this and the Baker report might help that

However, all she did, according to the delegation that was not GOP-free, was tell him a general message of hopefully peace from Israel...not a message of actually starting an international conference, and for the US side, all she did was re-iterate the basic Bush talking points about how they have to help us out more in Iraq

She walked a fine line and took an intelligent gamble in my views, turns out it helped in the middle east but didn't play so hot for a day or two in some editorials, no big stumble there

Olmert issued some weird half-correction and even if we did care, it didn't damage Israel's position, Syria is still laughing about them losing to Hezbollah

In regards to the US, Syria was at its high when the bipartisan report, which was supported in most parts by republicans and democrats, strongly advocated changing the Bush Policy on Syria and normalizing relations...having Pelosi at the end of a long list of republicans and democrats to visit Syria is no real boost to them, they're still waiting to see what will happen with the Baker report, so this does pretty much nothing in that area

It should be noted that Syria helped us after 9/11, and so far as to torture people for us at our request, and we never even labeled them in the axis of evil even after our relationship broke down...which was completely the US's fault, after Iraq fell over Syrian objections, things could have been ok but the US insisted on propping up Shia nationalists that would be certain to run the country and threaten Syria, there was even talk of invading Syria when Iraq was temporarily at peace

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

However, all she did, according to the delegation that was not GOP-free, was tell him a general message of hopefully peace from Israel...not a message of actually starting an international conference, and for the US side, all she did was re-iterate the basic Bush talking points about how they have to help us out more in Iraq

The words straight from her mouth say she spoke of diplomatic peace measures.

She walked a fine line and took an intelligent gamble in my views, turns out it helped in the middle east but didn't play so hot for a day or two in some editorials, no big stumble there

Olmert issued some weird half-correction and even if we did care, it didn't damage Israel's position, Syria is still laughing about them losing to Hezbollah

She didn't walk a fine line, she jumped over it. It's one thing if she did what the GOP members did (which I disagree with as well) and just did a meet and greet. She played international diplomat which was out of her realm as a senator, especially after being advised not to make the trip. The reason she was likely advised not to go and the GOP members weren't is simply because this is the shit she does and is capable of. And it came back and bit her in the butt. It's nice to see some media outlets willing to call her out on it.

In regards to the US, Syria was at its high when the bipartisan report, which was supported in most parts by republicans and democrats, strongly advocated changing the Bush Policy on Syria and normalizing relations...having Pelosi at the end of a long list of republicans and democrats to visit Syria is no real boost to them, they're still waiting to see what will happen with the Baker report, so this does pretty much nothing in that area

I could care less what someone's assumptions and interpretations are of Syria, Hezbollah or any other semi-related perceptions. The fact is she went there and crossed the line. She had no business doing what she did.

It should be noted that Syria helped us after 9/11, and so far as to torture people for us at our request, and we never even labeled them in the axis of evil even after our relationship broke down...which was completely the US's fault, after Iraq fell over Syrian objections, things could have been ok but the US insisted on propping up Shia nationalists that would be certain to run the country and threaten Syria, there was even talk of invading Syria when Iraq was temporarily at peace

What does any of this have to do with Pelosi going there and being an idiot?

[JaJae]

She's now trying to defend her trip to absurd levels:

Originally Posted by Pelosi

It became clear to President Assad that even though we have our differences in the United States, there is no division between the president and the Congress and the Democrats on the message we wanted him to receive.

Really because I thought the president specifically told her numerous times that he disagreed with her bill and would veto it and he was against her going over there at all. There was no message "we" wanted her to deliver that involves the president, congress and the Democrats. It was her parading around on a publicity stunt that went wrong.

[Thorgrim]

She wasn't an idiot, I don't disagree with anything she did and I feel you are using the letter of the custom and ignoring the spirit of the custom

The real problem would be if a president had an ongoing plan in fruitation that was being undermined by members of Congress in a direct way

She could have made tame speeches in the US that would have been far worse than her little visit

It was a public meeting, there is nothing below the radar here, Bush or Rice didn't meet with Pelosi and try to dissuade her, if it was serious they would have, considering how she mentioned the trip so far in advance

Ofcourse, Bush and Rice both know that not only do they have no diplomatic plans in any way for Syria, but that Syria views them as a lame duck administration and is more interested in dealing with McCain/Rudy or Obama/Hillary because that's the future of Syrian relations

Everyone knows the Bush policy, actually lack thereof, was not hurt by Pelosi's visit, and everyone in US diplomatic circles knows our overall diplomatic situation was not hurt...and that's the reason those rules are in place

An analogy would be a local traffic law for stopping 3 seconds at a stop sign before going, no matter the situation...after stopping for about 3 seconds, and checking to see no one was coming on a deserted road, the person drives through the intersection, two people are sitting in the cop car, one person says it was about 3 seconds, and she did everything the law wanted her to do...take her time, look both ways, make a real safe stop...the other cop says "no it was 2.7 seconds, that's just breaking the rules, it'll be anarchy im going to write her a ticket"

So maybe, just maybe, Pelosi didn't follow the letter of custom, even so, she didn't do any damage and everyone knows it...and I'm still waiting for that thread on all the horrible things she has done since 2002

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

She wasn't an idiot, I don't disagree with anything she did and I feel you are using the letter of the custom and ignoring the spirit of the custom

She was wrong in letter and spirit and mind, body and soul. She should not pretend to be diplomat for foreign relations in the middle east. It is not her place. No matter how much we despise Bush's strategy in the middle east it is simply not her place. It was wrong. If Rove had gone to Hezbollah and said "Hey, I'm here on the behalf of Israel to tell you they want peace, rock on good times.. Hey snap a picture of my good side and make sure everyone knows I'm working on diplomacy out here, k thx." And then Israel said, "We didn't tell you that, what's your problem.. knock it off" I'm willing to bet we'd be having a different conversation. I don't think the argument of "Bush is screwing up and in spirit Rove was trying to do the right thing, besides we've supported Hezbollah in the past so whateva Rove is not out of line for pretending to be diplomat" would fly.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

She's now trying to defend her trip to absurd levels:


Really because I thought the president specifically told her numerous times that he disagreed with her bill and would veto it and he was against her going over there at all. There was no message "we" wanted her to deliver that involves the president, congress and the Democrats. It was her parading around on a publicity stunt that went wrong.

What Syrian Bill, what "message" did the Bush administration disagree with Democrats on in relation to Syria, and when did he personally ask her not to go?

As far as I can see...nothing on the first two, and the third was just some low level state department officials who made some phone calls going "you know, i dont think its the best idea" Bush/Rice etc had plenty of time to take the podium and denounce her or just make a public appeal for her to stop...they didn't...as said in my previous post...they know it meant nothing, but they're quitely happy she got some bad press, thats the end of it

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by JaJae

She was wrong in letter and spirit and mind, body and soul. She should not pretend to be diplomat for foreign relations in the middle east. It is not her place. No matter how much we despise Bush's strategy in the middle east it is simply not her place. It was wrong. If Rove had gone to Hezbollah and said "Hey, I'm here on the behalf of Israel to tell you they want peace, rock on good times.. Hey snap a picture of my good side and make sure everyone knows I'm working on diplomacy out here, k thx." And then Israel said, "We didn't tell you that, what's your problem.. knock it off" I'm willing to bet we'd be having a different conversation. I don't think the argument of "Bush is screwing up and in spirit Rove was trying to do the right thing, besides we've supported Hezbollah in the past so whateva Rove is not out of line for pretending to be diplomat" would fly.

Syria is not Hezbollah, and she did not pretend anything

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

and when did he personally ask her not to go?

You haven't seen far enough then:

WASHINGTON (AP) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will visit Syria, a country President Bush has shunned as a sponsor of terrorism, despite being asked by the administration not to go.

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

As far as I can see...nothing on the first two, and the third was just some low level state department officials who made some phone calls going "you know, i dont think its the best idea" Bush/Rice etc had plenty of time to take the podium and denounce her or just make a public appeal for her to stop...they didn't...as said in my previous post...they know it meant nothing, but they're quitely happy she got some bad press, thats the end of it

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush voiced displeasure on Tuesday with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's trip to Syria, saying it sends mixed signals to the government of President Bashar Assad.
"A lot of people have gone to see President Assad....and yet we haven't seen action. He hasn't responded," Bush told reporters at a Rose Garden news conference.

He said Assad had not reined in violent elements of militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah as requested by the international community and had acted to destabilize the democratically elected government of Lebanon.

"Sending delegations doesn't work. It's simply been counterproductive," Bush said.

That sounds like Bush himself speaking to me

This whole thing is a big political showdown for this exact reason. You know this, don't try to argue otherwise.

[imind]

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.

how does this translate into 'without the authority of the president'? and if it does, did bush ever forbid her from going?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by imind

how does this translate into 'without the authority of the president'?

You're joking right?