Hey Nancy.........WTF are you doing???

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Sounds more like he co-ordinated his trip with the Clinton WH, and had permission.

Although I've previously asked in this thread what exactly does Pelosi need to know about Syria, and if there were bills pending etc - To which no ones responded (even though many continue to emphasize how important her trip was, apparently unable to articulate it beyond broad sweeping statements).

But it does occurr to me that the Speaker of the House is is in a very strong position to warn other nations about the possibility of war (which Newt seems to have been doing) because it's Congress that declares war. Not the Pres or State Department.

Fern

No, no, no. Newt made foreign policy declarations about Taiwan that were not in ANY way authorized by Clinton. Afterwards the president was running around like a maniac trying to repair the damage to chinese relations.

It's not the same thing as now, it was much much worse.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wall Street Journal piece says Pelosi likely committed a felony traveling to Damascus. I'd post the link but you need to be a subscriber to read more than the first paragraph.

You got an account?

If so, please do a cut -n-paste

I'm curious about how this could possible be a felony?

She broke U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45 of the Logan Act of 1799

U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45

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 all over the Internets now:

4-6-2007 Opinion writer claims Pelosi may have broken law by visiting Syria

An essay in this morning's Wall Street Journal argues that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, "may well have committed a felony" by traveling to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad."

Robert F. Turner, a State Department official during the Reagan administration, writes: Of course, not all congressional travel to, or communications with representatives of, foreign nations is unlawful. A purely fact-finding trip that involves looking around, visiting American military bases or talking with U.S. diplomats is not a problem. Nor is formal negotiation with foreign representatives if authorized by the president. ...

Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.

The Logan Act of 1799 sets out the punishment for unauthorized U.S. citizens who "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."

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

No, no, no. Newt made foreign policy declarations about Taiwan that were not in ANY way authorized by Clinton. Afterwards the president was running around like a maniac trying to repair the damage to chinese relations.

It's not the same thing as now, it was much much worse.

We'll I didn't gather that from the article, but I'll take your word for it. I can't seem to personally recall it even though I was living here at the time.

Nor would it surprise me in the least. I do recall Newt being hyper arrogant and full of a sense of self importance. I would guess that he thought himself more powerful, more relevant, more important than the President.

I hope Pelosi doesn't go ff the deep end like that.

Fern

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
4-6-2007 Opinion writer claims Pelosi may have broken law by visiting Syria
.
.
The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.

When did we declare war on Syria? :roll:

This "opinion writer" should consider keeping his lame opinion to himself. He seems to have a deeply flawed and selective memory.

GOP congressmen defend departure from Bush on Syria

The Associated Press

Tucson, Arizona | Published: 04.05.2007

WASHINGTON ? Three Republican congressmen who parted with President Bush by meeting with Syrian leaders said Wednesday it is important to maintain a dialogue with a country the White House says sponsors terrorism.

"I don't care what the administration says on this. You've got to do what you think is in the best interest of your country," said Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va. "I want us to be successful in Iraq. I want us to clamp down on Hezbollah."
Washington accuses Syria of backing Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups it deems terrorist organizations. The Bush administration also says Syria is contributing to the violence in Iraq.

The White House stayed relatively quiet about a trip to Syria by Wolf and GOP Reps. Robert Aderholt of Alabama and Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania.
The lawmakers said they made clear to Assad that they support Bush and were not representing the administration.

This is nothing new.

FLASHBACK: Hastert Traveled Abroad, Told Foreign Leaders Not To Listen To Clinton

President Bush yesterday said Speaker Pelosi?s bipartisan delegation to Syria sends ?mixed signals,? implying that Pelosi overstepped her bounds by merely visiting Syria.

In 1997, Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) led a delegation to Colombia at a time when U.S. officials were trying to attach human rights conditions to U.S. security assistance programs. Hastert specifically encouraged Colombian military officials to ?bypass? President Clinton and ?communicate directly with Congress.?

• ?a congressional delegation led by Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) which met with Colombian military officials, promising to ?remove conditions on assistance? and complaining about ?leftist-dominated? U.S. congresses of years past that ?used human rights as an excuse to aid the left in other countries.? Hastert said he would to correct this situation and expedite aid to countries allied in the war on drugs and also encouraged Colombian military officials to ?bypass the U.S. executive branch and communicate directly with Congress.?

Subsequently, U.S. Ambassador to Colombia Myles Frechette sent a cable complaining that Hastert?s actions had undermined his leverage with the Colombian military leadership.

In other instances, Hastert actually guided congressional staff to unilaterally reach deals with Colombian officials:

• House Foreign Affairs Committee staff, at the direction of the Hastert group, would fly to Colombia, meet with the nation?s anti-narcotics police and negotiate the levels and terms of assistance, the scope of the program and the kinds of equipment that would be needed. [/b]Rarely were the U.S. diplomatic personnel in our embassy in Bogata consulted about the ?U.S.? position in these negotiations, and in a number of instances they were excluded from or not even made aware of the meetings.[/b]

I guess it's difficult for admin mouthpieces to keep the truth in sight while their heads are so firmly clamped between their gluteal cheeks.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wall Street Journal piece says Pelosi likely committed a felony traveling to Damascus. I'd post the link but you need to be a subscriber to read more than the first paragraph.

You got an account?

If so, please do a cut -n-paste

I'm curious about how this could possible be a felony?

She broke U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45 of the Logan Act of 1799

U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45

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 all over the Internets now:

4-6-2007 Opinion writer claims Pelosi may have broken law by visiting Syria

An essay in this morning's Wall Street Journal argues that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, "may well have committed a felony" by traveling to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad."

Robert F. Turner, a State Department official during the Reagan administration, writes: Of course, not all congressional travel to, or communications with representatives of, foreign nations is unlawful. A purely fact-finding trip that involves looking around, visiting American military bases or talking with U.S. diplomats is not a problem. Nor is formal negotiation with foreign representatives if authorized by the president. ...

Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.

The Logan Act of 1799 sets out the punishment for unauthorized U.S. citizens who "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."

Thanks Dave.

I've never heard of this before. I wonder what compelled Congress to pass this?

I wonder if anyone has ever been prosecuted under this law?

I wonder if Pelosi can authorize her self?

I wonder if she took along some Repubs as a measure to ensure the Pres wouldn't try to enforce it on her

I have no doubt it's much ado about nothing. I just can't see the WH pressing the matter. But it is interesting.

Oh, it just occured to me that, IIRC, Jesse Jackson has broken this law without any problem. Hasn't he gone, without approval, to foreign hostile goverments to get back hostages etc?

Fern

 

[fskimospy]

WOW would that be a huge stretch. Again, by that measure Newt Gingrich would be a felon as well... and lets be honest here, neither one is.

Also, its the WSJ editorial page... what did you expect?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: eskimospy


The White House issued a statement saying that the policy of the United States was to ''meet its obligation under the Taiwan Relations Act, including the maintenance of an adequate self-defense for Taiwan,'' and that the Administration would maintain its ''one-China policy, the fundamental bedrock of which is that both parties peacefully address the Taiwan issue. . . ."

In an interview on Friday, Mr. Gingrich said he had spoken with Mr. Clinton, and with Mr. Gore on several occasions, to make sure that their messages to Beijing dovetailed. At the time, he did not mention his message on Taiwan.

--Taken from Glenn Greenwald's blog

Sounds more like he co-ordinated his trip with the Clinton WH, and had permission.

Although I've previously asked in this thread what exactly does Pelosi need to know about Syria, and if there were bills pending etc - To which no ones responded (even though many continue to emphasize how important her trip was, apparently unable to articulate it beyond broad sweeping statements).

But it does occurr to me that the Speaker of the House is is in a very strong position to warn other nations about the possibility of war (which Newt seems to have been doing) because it's Congress that declares war. Not the Pres or State Department.

Fern

Oh, I suppose we should all accept what Bush and neo-con's view on Syria's role in this war against Terror. Nobody should ever go to the ME region and trying to see what exactly is going on. Yeap, I am sure Bush and neo-con's have proved themselves by handling ME matter with extreme effectiveness, and we never need to know anything about ME region, other than whatever Bush tells us.

Or maybe Syria has no role in this War on Terror, or maybe this war on terror is nothing important and no American life or dollar is dependent on it.

You tell me, what exactly does the leader the legislative branch, under a system that each branch is suppose to provide checks and balances so no one branch takes over the US, need to know about Syria.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
WOW would that be a huge stretch. Again, by that measure Newt Gingrich would be a felon as well... and lets be honest here, neither one is.

Also, its the WSJ editorial page... what did you expect?

Well, it does seem like the law applies.

Mostly, seems like a poorly written law. But then again, there may be some commentary (tax bills always have explanatory comment associated with them) that makes it a little clearer what "authority of the US" means. I mean clearly Pelosi has a boat load of "US authority".

Would seem unlikley Congresspersons would pass a law that could be used against themselves. It's not like battles/disagreements between Congress and the President are a rare occurence. Congresspersons from the other party are always going on international trips etc.

If the media keeps it up maybe some DC lawyer(s) will explain the law better for us.

Fern

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: rchiu
You tell me, what exactly does the leader the legislative branch, under a system that each branch is suppose to provide checks and balances so no one branch takes over the US, need to know about Syria.

Well, that's my question.

So, I dunno unless the Legislative branch wants to discus war (their domain), conduct foreign diplomacy (not their role), discuss foreign aide they may vote for (not relevant here AFAIK), or pander for business contracts (not possible IIRC), so I can't think of anything myself.

And I doubt Pelosi is going over there to get any information on how GWB & co. are running the Exec branch, information she may need in excercising the oversight role. E.g., I doubt Bashir knows anything, or cares about, oh say, the dismissal of US attorney Generals etc.

So, still looking for the answer....

Fern

 

[ProfJohn]

If Pelosi did break the law can we add her to the list of people we are going to impeach?
Bush, Cheney, Pelosi? I am sure we can get them all if we try hard enough.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Pabster
Wall Street Journal piece says Pelosi likely committed a felony traveling to Damascus. I'd post the link but you need to be a subscriber to read more than the first paragraph.

You got an account?

If so, please do a cut -n-paste

I'm curious about how this could possible be a felony?

She broke U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45 of the Logan Act of 1799

U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 45

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 all over the Internets now:

4-6-2007 Opinion writer claims Pelosi may have broken law by visiting Syria

An essay in this morning's Wall Street Journal argues that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, "may well have committed a felony" by traveling to Damascus to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad."

Robert F. Turner, a State Department official during the Reagan administration, writes: Of course, not all congressional travel to, or communications with representatives of, foreign nations is unlawful. A purely fact-finding trip that involves looking around, visiting American military bases or talking with U.S. diplomats is not a problem. Nor is formal negotiation with foreign representatives if authorized by the president. ...

Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad.

The U.S. is in the midst of two wars authorized by Congress. For Ms. Pelosi to flaunt the Constitution in these circumstances is not only shortsighted; it may well be a felony, as the Logan Act has been part of our criminal law for more than two centuries. Perhaps it is time to enforce the law.

The Logan Act of 1799 sets out the punishment for unauthorized U.S. citizens who "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."

Thanks Dave.

I've never heard of this before. I wonder what compelled Congress to pass this?

I wonder if anyone has ever been prosecuted under this law?

I wonder if Pelosi can authorize her self?

I wonder if she took along some Repubs as a measure to ensure the Pres wouldn't try to enforce it on her

I have no doubt it's much ado about nothing. I just can't see the WH pressing the matter. But it is interesting.

Oh, it just occured to me that, IIRC, Jesse Jackson has broken this law without any problem. Hasn't he gone, without approval, to foreign hostile goverments to get back hostages etc?

Fern

You're welcome.

I suspect that Republicans that went will be declared "Authorized" by the authority that the President is a fellow Republican and that the Democrats declared "Enemy Combatants". We'll see when congress returns from Easter recess.

 

[OrByte]

If the white house pursues a legal course against the house speaker....that would be a mistake.

Pelosi is about as untouchable as GWB. There is a serious standoff going on in our government right now.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If Pelosi did break the law can we add her to the list of people we are going to impeach?
Bush, Cheney, Pelosi? I am sure we can get them all if we try hard enough.

It's a vague statute which means no prosecution would likely succeed. But it's also UNLIKELY that Pelosi violated the Logan Act b/c she was explicit in stating it was a fact finding mission.

background on Logan Act

Nothing in section 953, however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution.

In essence, Pelosi doesn't even have to claim she had no intent of intervening in the US/Syria dispute. She can pretty much do whatever she wants considering the Congress can offer, debate, and even pass (over a Presidential veto) legislation addressing a dispute between the US and a foreign government . . . be it declaring war or a new treaty.

But I doubt the loons that get 'information' from the OpEd of the WSJ would bother to actually read the statute and its context and then bother to apply basic logic in the current context.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: EXman
And she hope to accomplish what?

Anything more than the absolute NOTHING the admin is accomplishing.

Why couldn't we just stop her plane from leaving wasn't she on "Queen Bee One" her bloated mothership?

Speaking of bloated, how's your overblown rhetoric? Not as partisan as yours! You haven't given any reason she shouldn't pursue her duties as an American legislator. Would you prefer that she works using the same kind of ignorance the Bushwhackos have used to lead our nation and the world into its present state of shambles? :shocked:

I'm sure it was "For the Kids" right?

No, it was for the morons who are too blind to see that talking doesn't cost anything while maintaining silence and ignorance guarantee that any possible breakthroughs will be missed. :roll:

Thanks Harvey. Crap even left leaning Tim Russert, and Matt Laurer Tim Russert, Matt Lauer and the Washington Post are making fun of her. Her Talking makes us look weak, incompetent, phoney, easier to beat and just plain silly. Talking ain't free it will cost us later down the road and it is costing her political capital now.

She delivered a message to Assad from Isreal They are ready for peace talks w/o giving the conditions (Stop funding terrorists, etc.) What a goober. That accomplishes well let's see nothing. More incompetence.

Here's some info:

A "clarification" issued by the prime minister's office emphasized that Syria "continues to be part of the axis of evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East." The use of President Bush's famous term for countries like Syria that sponsor terror underlined the strength of Olmert's rebuff to the senior Democrat.

Contrary to Pelosi's assertions, Olmert's statement made it clear that "what was communicated to the U.S. House speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel, as was communicated to other foreign leaders."

So Pelosi not only gave Assad a false image of U.S. foreign policy, but of Israeli foreign policy as well...
But the kind of Democrats now ruling the roost in Congress think nothing of placing politics above the national interest. The speaker went to Syria to show up President Bush by making it look like all he's had to do for years now is stop being a hardliner, arrange for some face time with hostile Islamic governments and -- voila! -- there will be progress in the Middle East peace process.

Meanwhile, Pelosi refused to support our steadfast ally Britain by allowing the House vote on a resolution condemning Iran for taking British sailors hostage. Instead, she goes halfway around the world to coddle our enemy.

Luckily for America Nancy Pelosi's incompetence means there's been only one casualty so far from her independent foreign policy: the speaker's ever-plummeting reputation.

Yahoo news source.

Even The French see her as an appeaser.

 

[nullzero]

Our government and country has never been this politically divided since the Civil War. Start of a new big change in the government and politcal cycle?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Bush policies make the USA look weak, incompetent, phony, and just plain silly.

Asia Times on Bush's incoherent Iran policy

Daniel Pipes on silly Bush policy

Middle East Policy Council . . . Bush policy weak on terror

Rolling Stone on Bush's phony 'war on terror'

I will leave it for DIY to find references on Bush's incompetent foreign policy . . . shouldn't be difficult.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Bush policies make the USA look weak, incompetent, phony, and just plain silly.

Asia Times on Bush's incoherent Iran policy

Daniel Pipes on silly Bush policy

Middle East Policy Council . . . Bush policy weak on terror

Rolling Stone on Bush's phony 'war on terror'

I will leave it for DIY to find references on Bush's incompetent foreign policy . . . shouldn't be difficult.

I don't disagree but what right does it give Queen Bee Pelosi the green light to reinforce how stupid we are? You must be confusing me with a neocon. I'm an old school conservative. I could name many things on which Bush is dead wrong on.

You need to understand just because I think Pelosi is a treasonous (logan act) turd, doesn't mean I'd not like to flush President Bush down the toilet now and again.

Do you understand? I know that it is hard for you to attack me once you know I'm not a neocon and that you actually have to argue the facts here. One thing I am certain on though President Bush is the President and Ms. Pelosi will never be.

I see in your future.

Peace and War,

EX

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I don't follow how Pelosi's trip reinforced Bush43 Regime stupidity. The height of stupidity was originally voting for him in 2000. We managed to surpass that by re-electing him (sorta). Bush has proven that bad policies can be made worse if you leave the same imbecile at the helm.

I'm not defending the San Francisco Treat but you are misreading the Logan Act if you believe it actually applies to her trip. The fact that you think her trip is misguided and/or her execution was incompetent has no bearing on its relationship to the Logan Act. It simply does NOT apply to what she did.

It's irrelevant that you are not a neocon or Bush sycophant. For the record, I don't believe I attacked you. My intent was merely to highlight the disconnect between characterizing Pelosi's trip as (weak, incompetent, phony, and silly) when it was largely directed at CORRECTING 6 years of weak, incoherent, phony, silly, and incompetent policies by Bush43. Granted, I think the preceding 8 years of policy leave MUCH to be desired.

We can even agree to disagree as to whether Pelosi's trip violated the Logan Act. Even if I agreed with such a determination, it's irrelevant b/c no court (except a Bush tribunal and we know that's more marsupial than the kangaroo itself) would sustain the notion that Logan supercedes the ability of legislators (even less so the Speaker) to gather information that will directly affect how they will carry out their Constitutional duties.

 

[theeedude]

Kindasleazy has a nice job. Not talking to anyone, nothing for her to do, just collect a paycheck.

 

[EXman]

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.

I can see both sides but who authorized her? Herself? Once again Queen Bee syndrome.

Your original post after mine goes off topic about Bush and his sorry ass policies. That is kind of the liberal MO. Attack Bush Attack Bush... Bush's Fault Bush's Fault... and well I'm sure you can do better than the average Lib.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: EXman

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.

I can see both sides but who authorized her? Herself? Once again Queen Bee syndrome.

Your original post after mine goes off topic about Bush and his sorry ass policies. That is kind of the liberal MO. Attack Bush Attack Bush... Bush's Fault Bush's Fault... and well I'm sure you can do better than the average Lib.

I think you are being too simplistic. There aren't TWO sides b/c Pelosi needs NO authorization in the execution of her Constitutional duties. She should (and did) inform the Executive branch of her intentions but they have no practical control over her.

Regardless of your personal animosity towards the Queen Bee . . . she's still the Queen Bee. The position of Speaker has historically been an extremely powerful position in the US government. You may dislike it (along with Bush Regime apologists) but you better get use to royal jelly from Grand Dame of Pacific Heights.

There's nothing OT by highlighting the ridiculously incompetent policies of Bush43 era. In essence, if our foreign policy was good:
1) Pelosi would have gone to Olmert with a message of unqualified US support as Israel executes a plan of regional dialog and engagement towards a lasting resolution of disputes. Basically, a personal message noting a unified US approach regardless of our domestic policy disagreements.

2) Pelosi would have gone to Assad with a message of qualified US support as Syria continues to cooperate in the security of the Iraqi border, transport of Iraqi oil, and isolating regional groups that do not renounce terrorism.

3) Pelosi would have gone to the House of Saud with a message of . . . shape up or we will support opposition groups seeking to bring democratic reforms. We then offer to sell them cellulosic biobutanol and sewage-algae biodiesel.

Bush isn't to blame for everything that's gone wrong in the world since Jan 2001. But he's done little to help and much to harm. Pelosi's field trip is a blip but it still signals to the world (and more importantly to Bush) that the days of unchecked bad policy are over. So unless you are planning to blame the past 14 years of bad foreign policy on the naturalized woman, black man, and black concubine . . . Bush and Clinton get the lion's share of credit for the US contribution to the Middle East/Central Asia debacle.

Nancy and George foreign policy

great synopsis of Bush foreign policy

 

[imported_Equinox]

Good grief, what a bunch of noise. Newsflash - a politician visited a foreign country OMG. She could have danced naked in the street and it wouldn't make things worse than what our president has done. GWB is such a disaster at diplomacy, leadership and general competence, I doubt anyone could screw up the ME worse than he has. He has made a mockery of the presidency, and all of the attempts to rewrite history aren't going to cut it. He's gone to far to even save himself, these days, and only the blindest of his supporters are even trying to defend his actions.

________________________________
"One thing I am certain on though President Bush is the President and Ms. Pelosi will never be. "
______________________________________

To that I'll respond then why doesn't he act like a president?

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I don't follow how Pelosi's trip reinforced Bush43 Regime stupidity. The height of stupidity was originally voting for him in 2000. We managed to surpass that by re-electing him (sorta). Bush has proven that bad policies can be made worse if you leave the same imbecile at the helm.

I'm not defending the San Francisco Treat but you are misreading the Logan Act if you believe it actually applies to her trip. The fact that you think her trip is misguided and/or her execution was incompetent has no bearing on its relationship to the Logan Act. It simply does NOT apply to what she did.

It's irrelevant that you are not a neocon or Bush sycophant. For the record, I don't believe I attacked you. My intent was merely to highlight the disconnect between characterizing Pelosi's trip as (weak, incompetent, phony, and silly) when it was largely directed at CORRECTING 6 years of weak, incoherent, phony, silly, and incompetent policies by Bush43. Granted, I think the preceding 8 years of policy leave MUCH to be desired.

We can even agree to disagree as to whether Pelosi's trip violated the Logan Act. Even if I agreed with such a determination, it's irrelevant b/c no court (except a Bush tribunal and we know that's more marsupial than the kangaroo itself) would sustain the notion that Logan supercedes the ability of legislators (even less so the Speaker) to gather information that will directly affect how they will carry out their Constitutional duties.

Let me propose a question: Do you believe Pelosi went to Iran BECAUSE of Bush? Had a different prez been int he chair would she have gone? Or are you so filled with hatred you cant see her actions APART from Bush are treasonous? The ACTION ITSELF.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Equinox
Good grief, what a bunch of noise. Newsflash - a politician visited a foreign country OMG. She could have danced naked in the street and it wouldn't make things worse than what our president has done. GWB is such a disaster at diplomacy, leadership and general competence, I doubt anyone could screw up the ME worse than he has. He has made a mockery of the presidency, and all of the attempts to rewrite history aren't going to cut it. He's gone to far to even save himself, these days, and only the blindest of his supporters are even trying to defend his actions.

________________________________
"One thing I am certain on though President Bush is the President and Ms. Pelosi will never be. "
______________________________________

To that I'll respond then why doesn't he act like a president?

lol

It would be interesting to hear your thoughts had we had meetings with Pol Pot back in the day hahaha

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Yeah cuz it's just like that.... :roll: