• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pelosi Defies White house - To Meet W/Terrorists!

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So it's ok for one elected official (Bush) to do it but not another (Pelosi)?
Actually - yes. Study your American Goverment! The President DOES have the authority and power to negotiate treaties, to enter into negotiations, etc. The Speaker of the House DOES NOT! Doing these things are well out of the boundaries of her responsibilities.

Again, the Logan Act of 1790 was created specifically to prevent a situation like this - a lone Congressman or Senator who disagrees with a sitting U.S. President, disagreeing with that President's Foreign Policy, and deciding to go 'rogue' - disobeying the foreign policy of that President, and going out to create/establish his or her OWN foreign policy.

I have heard even stronger talk from partisan parties who, IMO, are pushing the envelope, talking about having Pelosi charged for treason. Their argument goes like this:

Syria has been physically proven to be supporting terrorism and have physically aided in attacks against Israel. Syrian fighters have also been captured and killed in Iraq, attempting to kill Americans. Therefoe we are at war with Syria - an un-declared/un-official 3rd-party type of war rather than head-to-head conflict - and Pelosi met with, negotiated with, and aided and abetted the leader of the terrorist regime - our enemy. They liken her actions to Kerry when he met with leaders of North Viet Nam in Paris, while we were at war, as a citizen and NOT a representative of the U.S., to negotiate his country's (the U.S.) surrender.

Personally, you have to put a lot of pieces together and assume a lot to buy that argument, and that is way too much for me. The Logan Act, however, is simple and straight forward. It is spelled out and clearly defined. There is no doubt that she violated this act - no assumptions have to be made. All you have to do is read the act and look at her actions.

She ignored set/established foreign policy because she simply disagreed. she sought to establish her own foreign policy. She also sought to undermine the power of the President, to embarass him, AND to get major media attention. She did not speak on behalf of herself because the word of Nancy Pelosi means nothing. She spoke on behalf of the United States, as a representative of the United States Goverment, which she had no authority to do.

Everyone there knew of President Bush's foreign policy of isolating Syria, so she had to pull another 'card' - she chose Israel. She had already contacted Ohlmert regarding her meeting in Syria, and he told her he thought the meeting was a mistake - NOT 'you speak for Israel, go and tell Assad we are ready to return to the table.' She declared to Assad and the world, however, that she DID speak for Israel and Ohlmert and that their message was that Israel WAS ready to return to the peace talk tables. Pelosi and the Libs take very lightly the little 'speed bump to peace' that is Syrias belief that Israel does NOT have the RIGHT TO EXIST and believes such a tiny issue should not stand in the way of peace. :roll: After all, several countries (and Americans evidently) believe we should have no right to exist, and it doesn't stop us....of course, no one is acting on that belief by kidnapping our soldier, killing our women and children by suicide bombings, and lobbing shells across our border!

Maybe you do not see the harm of an individual politician dis-agreeing with the President, disobeying a ban on a nation,and going their to negotiate on their own in the name of the entire United states.

Hopefully you will see the harm of a politician, especially one in such a high seat/position in our goverment, traveling to a terrorist state to NEGOTIATE with that terrorist leader on behalf of a 3rd Part/Nation WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION, especially when that terrorist nation has been responsible for the deaths of hyndred os their people, the kidnapping of their soldiers, and their existence threatened while they continue to demand that Israel does NOT have the right to even exist!

HOPEFULLY you will see and admit to the damage that has been done by the Speaker of the House, after illegally negotiating with a terrorist leader on behalf of Israel, which she had no authority to do, being called a LIAR in front of the whole world by Ohlmert, the leader of Israel!

If you don't see the damage Pelosi has caused, though not GRAVE, and the problem with infividual politicians who do not have the authority by law to negotiate with nations doing so anyway, then we have a bigger problem in this country than Pelosi running around the world speaking on behalf of anyone she feels like!
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Interesting... I wonder if bush has the balls to push the logan act...


the irony of the new dem speaker of the house getting brought up on charges when she was put in there by her voters to get bush up on charges is really pretty funny... or horrific depending on your perspective I guess...



If I were bush I'd use this to at least get some leverage on the house. Couldn't hurt his position if one of his main power rivals is in deep crap with the law.


What are the penalities for violating this law?


Of course, you have to be careful because it can backfire... but definitely worth exploring.
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
If I were Bush, I would push the issue, not in an a partisan attemmpt to strike back at the DNC but more importantly to redefine the boundaries, to stem the trend of politicians opverstepping their bounds and encroaching on responsibilities and powers that only the President have!

Of course somebody putting Pelosi back in her place would be highly beneficial .


Unfortunately, I have no confidence, much like Iran, that she will be punished in any way for her actions.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
does anyone know what the precedence is for punishment? I mean, what's the damage? Is it a fine? Is it imprisonment? Is it execution? What has historically happened to people that broke this?
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
23,380
Reaction score
8,538
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
does anyone know what the precedence is for punishment? I mean, what's the damage? Is it a fine? Is it imprisonment? Is it execution? What has historically happened to people that broke this?
It won't ever happen because it is unconstitutional. In over 200 years it has been used to find a person quilty a total of - wait for it.....ZERO TIMES.
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I honestly and straighforwardly do not have a clue what the punishment is for such a violation.

Now for the Opinion:

I would call for a stern Censure of Pelosi, with a warning that if she over-stepped her bounds (violated the Separation of Powers according to the U.S. Constitution as well as violating the Logan Act of 1790 again by attempting to negotiate with foreign nations/states, thereby attempting to create her own foreign policy) she would be removed as Speaker of the House.

Of course the Legislative Branch Majorit-Party Democrats would go APE over the idea and would refuse to do it. Just the act of 'charging her' with the violation and pointing out exactly how she officially over-stepped her bounds would drive a point home, though! It would remind all politicians of their boundaries and limitations, as defined by the Constitution and laws, would enforce the fact that they can NOT run around doing ANYTHING they wasnt, and would reign them in, if only a little and for a short time!
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It won't ever happen because it is unconstitutional. In over 200 years it has been used to find a person quilty a total of - wait for it.....ZERO TIMES.
Your factually IN-CORRECT OPINION means as much as wings for a pig!

FACT: The Act/law IS on the books and is still very much Legal.

Fact: You mentioned the Constitution yet fail to acknowledge that Pelosi violated the Separation of Powers as DEFINED in the Constitution! She committed acts that she does not have the authority to do, as per the Constitution that you keep throwing out! In doing so, she illegally entered into negotiations with a terrorist state and FALSELY passed herself off as an Ambassador/Representative of Israel, which she was called on before the entire WORLD!
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Your factually IN-CORRECT OPINION means as much as wings for a pig!

FACT: The Act/law IS on the books and is still very much Legal.

Fact: You mentioned the Constitution yet fail to acknowledge that Pelosi violated the Separation of Powers as DEFINED in the Constitution! She committed acts that she does not have the authority to do, as per the Constitution that you keep throwing out! In doing so, she illegally entered into negotiations with a terrorist state and FALSELY passed herself off as an Ambassador/Representative of Israel, which she was called on before the entire WORLD!
A law on the books that has been ignored for over 200 years because it squashes individual liberty.

Please do hold your breath though and wait for it to happen. I'm trying to take the conservative movement back and this would help.
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A law on the books that has been ignored for over 200 years because it squashes individual liberty.

Please do hold your breath though and wait for it to happen. I'm trying to take the conservative movement back and this would help.
The last time it was invoked/used was against Jesse Jackson (look it up) when he decided he wanted to intercede and, as a U.S.CITIZEN , act as a U.S. Ambassador. There is a law in Mississippi that you can't ride a hippo down main street - it hasn't been used, but it still a LAW. As long as it is on the books and has not been repealed, it is STILL a LAW. By your words, you are not for enforcing existing Laws. There is a law against hiring illegals - it isn't/hasn't been used much either, as Bush does not believe in enforcing it! You guys are just 2 ppeas in a pod!

YOU claim the Logan Act is un-Constitutional - you're full of CR@P! The Constitution defines the powers and authorities of the 3 Branches of Goverment. The Speaker of the House, for example, does not have the authority, right, or permission to violate foreign policy, create her own, meet with foreign heads of state, and especially to negotiate anything in the name of the U.S. The Logan act supports and even enforces that very seperation of powers by specifying that no one but the President has the authority to do so! So HOW is the Logan act UN-Constitutional! JUST the opposite is indeed the fact!

Pelosi demonstrated, however, WHY this Act is still around, why it is pertenent today, and why it is still very much needed!!

How can you 'take the conservative movement back' when you are willing to lay down and allow the Democrats violate the very Constitution you claim as a Conservative to care about?! True Conservatives should be pointing out and making a big deal about the fact that Liberals are violating the Separation of Powers as defined by the Constitution, should demand that the Constitution be upheld, and should demand that elected politicians act within the boundaries as specified by the Constitution instead of ignoring it in their attempts to usurp the authority of the President/Executive Branch!

If you are willing to stand by and allow the Constitution to be trampled, laws to be broken, and power-hungry, party-1st zealots take over, then there is no way in HE!! I want you anywhere near the Conservative movement leadership!
 
Last edited:

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The last time it was invoked/used was against Jesse Jackson (look it up) when he decided he wanted to intercede and, as a U.S.CITIZEN , act as a U.S. Ambassador. There is a law in Mississippi that you can't ride a hippo down main street - it hasn't been used, but it still a LAW that, as long as it is on the books and has not been repealed, it is STILL a LAW.

Pelosi demonstrated, however, WHY this Act is still around, why it is pertenent today, and why it is still very much needed!!
As ARealConservative said...lets hold our breaths and see if it is invoked against her.
 

easyt65

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
2,061
Reaction score
6
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As ARealConservative said...lets hold our breaths and see if it is invoked against her.

If ARealConservative is going to 'take over and lead the new Conservative movement' he needs to stop sounding so much like a LIBERAL!

I never said it WOULD be invoked, but I gave my opinion that it SHOULD be because, whether you/he or the Libs want to admit it, Pelosi violated the Constituion, Separation of Powers, and violated the Logan Act! THAT is a fact! The Liberals all claim that if she - or any other Liberal ever in trouble - is not convicted of anything, then there was no crime! (He DOES sound like a Liberal.) That is BS!
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
If you are going to 'take over and lead the new Conservative movement' you need to stop sounding so much like a LIBERAL!

I never said it WOULD be invoked, but I gave my opinion that it SHOULD be because, whether you or the Libs want to admit it, Pelosi violated the Constituion, Separation of Powers, and violated the Logan Act! THAT is a fact! The Liberals all claim that if she - or any other Liberal ever in trouble - is not convicted of anything, then there was no crime! (You DO sound like a Liberal.) That is BS!
This idiotic assumption right here is exactly why I knew better than to even enter this conversation with you. Thank you for reaffirming my belief that partisan hackmanship is a pointless pursuit.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
It won't ever happen because it is unconstitutional. In over 200 years it has been used to find a person quilty a total of - wait for it.....ZERO TIMES.
Ah, then it is unlikely that bush will act upon it.


Upon what grounds do you claim it is unconstitutional? Freedom of speech? Certainly we are not questioning her personal freedom of speech but her freedom to officially express a position or make an offer to a foreign power. The is an obvious distinction that I don't think you can honestly paper over.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Interesting... I wonder if bush has the balls to push the logan act...
I wonder if the majority Democrats have the guts to do the right thing and remove her from the speakership and censure her so we don't have to have a constitutional crisis in the middle of a war.

the irony of the new Democrat speaker of the house getting brought up on charges when she was put in there by her voters
She was not put in there by voters, she was put in there by the Democrats in the House, they should remove her.

to get bush up on charges is really pretty funny... or horrific depending on your perspective I guess...
I think it quite horrific the political games they have been playing, dangerous political games.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I wonder if the majority Democrats have the guts to do the right thing and remove her from the speakership and censure her so we don't have to have a constitutional crisis in the middle of a war.
not going to happen... they have a majority of the congress and if anything want to impeach Bush.

Please deal with the political tactical reality.

She was not put in there by voters, she was put in there by the Democrats in the House, they should remove her.
who were put in office by democrats that are generally pretty hostile to the administration.


I think it quite horrific the political games they have been playing, dangerous political games.
Yes, though everyone is so sure it's the other guy's fault that it's hard to come to any kind of conclusion.


I would argue that the US's political system is starting to unravel because of all this rep, dem, left, right tension. We're having a very hard time working together and instead are simply engaged in an endless political civil war. We're not trying to live with each other we're trying to dominate each other... to shoot down enemies, fortify allies, set traps and then temp enemies into them... on and on. Perhaps I'm missing the bigger picture but this doesn't seem sustainable.


Either we need to start respecting each other at some point or we need to just get it over with and start killing each other.
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
not going to happen... they have a majority of the congress and if anything want to impeach Bush.

Please deal with the political tactical reality.
Oh the reality is if they don't get rid of her either they will lose politcal power or we will see our demise, hopefully the former.


who were put in office by democrats that are generally pretty hostile to the administration.
Yes and shortsighted they were, will they wake up before it's too late.


I would argue that the US's political system is starting to unravel because of all this rep, Democrat, left, right tension.
The tension is from the left, they have nothing but opposition and investigation to offer and they are willing to risk the security of the country to get back the White House. And just look what they are doing with the power they have now.

We're having a very hard time working together and instead are simply engaged in an endless political civil war.
Well look at what the Dems have been engaged in. Not reasoned debate but vicious baseless attacks, unwarranted attacks, propaganda and misrepresentation. They empower our enemies to fight on just so they can oppose Bush.

We're not trying to live with each other we're trying to dominate each other... to shoot down enemies, fortify allies, set traps and then temp enemies into them... on and on.
How are they Republicans doing that to the Dems?

Either we need to start respecting each other at some point or we need to just get it over with and start killing each other.
How has Bush disrespected Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid versus the vile rhetoric and bogus accusations they have engaged in?
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Oh the reality is if they don't get rid of her either they will lose politcal power or we will see our demise, hopefully the former.
Now THAT is possible. If you want her out of power then her party is going to have to be voted out of power. Pelosi herself is in a safe district so individually she won't be voted out of anything.


Term limits are a really good idea... for both parties. I don't know... two or three terms at most.




The tension is from the left, they have nothing but opposition and investigation to offer and they are willing to risk the security of the country to get back the White House. And just look what they are doing with the power they have now.
that's not true, you have a very provocative element in the right wing that is just as bad. Sean Hannity type people... that just harp on the democrats for being democrats without actually discussing anything.

We'd all benefit by getting rid of these people on both sides they're not helping the situation. I think John Stewart mad this point on CNN or tried to... not that I agree with John's politics but I think he made a good point on Cross fire that this substanceless confrontationalism is damaging to our political system.



Well look at what the Democrats have been engaged in. Not reasoned debate but vicious baseless attacks, unwarranted attacks, propaganda and misrepresentation. They empower our enemies to fight on just so they can oppose Bush.
some republicans do that too... look, I'm not saying they don't do that... I'm saying BOTH sides have to work on this.



How are they Republicans doing that to the Dems?
the last congress shut the dems out fairly solidly what's more you're not going to tell me that the rep's haven't been playing their own political games out there.


How has Bush disrespected Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid versus the vile rhetoric and bogus accusations they have engaged in?
Bush hasn't. He's president. Presidents typically don't directly engage stuff like that. However allied forces do.


Look, I'm not in anyway defending Pelosi and crowd. She's out of control. But the solution is not to just attack her but attack what has allowed her to get away with this. We all need to chill out and start demanding reason and logic from each other. If we're all running on emotion then all we'll get is a bar room fight.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Look, I'm not in anyway defending Pelosi and crowd. She's out of control. But the solution is not to just attack her but attack what has allowed her to get away with this. We all need to chill out and start demanding reason and logic from each other. If we're all running on emotion then all we'll get is a bar room fight.
What's with all this usual conservative 'attack' talk - and, all this unsurprising ignorance of what Pelosi has accomplished in Syria?

Pelosi didn't go there to subvert Bush's policies as so falsely charged in this thread. The official record of her remarks to the Syrian president shows that she reiterated Bush's policy in more basic terms and bluntness than smooth-talking George did.

So, put those guns away. You just might accidently hurt a friend!
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
What's with all this usual conservative 'attack' talk - and, all this unsurprising ignorance of what Pelosi has accomplished in Syria?

Pelosi didn't go there to subvert Bush's policies as so falsely charged in this thread. The official record of her remarks to the Syrian president shows that she reiterated Bush's policy in more basic terms and bluntness than smooth-talking George did.

So, put those guns away. You just might accidently hurt a friend!
I'm not attacking. As to what she went there to do, it's clear that she went there to represent the US to Syria. That is something she is legally forbidden to do. So I do say that that is out of control unless she'll be charged and punished. As she won't be she's out of control.


See? I choose my words very carefully. I also have very specific opinions.


As to putting away the guns, I agree! We all need to chill out and remember that we're all Americans here. Lets work together and stop treating each other like the enemy! ;)


As much as we might disagree about stuff we agree on more then anyone else in the world would with either of our factions. Who cares about the US constitution besides americans? Republican and Democrat care about these things. So please just have a bit more respect for the opposition. I work at that all the time... and it's not always easy. But it keeps me from falling into illogical thought patterns. Keep your eyes on the prize here people.


The ultimate goal is not to win the next election but to live in a glorious nation. We can't be that glorious nation if we spend 90 percent of our time trying to trip each other or pasting "kick me" signs on each other's backs.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm not attacking. As to what she went there to do, it's clear that she went there to represent the US to Syria. That is something she is legally forbidden to do. So I do say that that is out of control unless she'll be charged and punished. As she won't be she's out of control.
I continue to be puzzled about charges on this forum that Pelosi made an illegal trip to represent the US to Syria- like, she's forbidden to do so.

Why aren't condemnations and charges coming from the White House - and, from Congress - the public in general?
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I continue to be puzzled about charges on this forum that Pelosi made an illegal trip to represent the US to Syria- like, she's forbidden to do so.

Why aren't condemnations and charges coming from the White House - and, from Congress - the public in general?
I don't know if you can legitimately claim to be puzzled unless you haven't done any research into the event. Perhaps this would be of use.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33265.pdf

It gives a lot of information on the logan act which was specifically put into law to prevent things like what Pelosi has done. It will give you the full history and purpose of the act.


As to why there haven't been charges that would be more a matter of politics. Pelosi is a powerful political figure... you don't file charges unless you know that you can win both legally and fend off her political supporters.


I would imagine that charges are being contemplated but whether they are ever filed or not will likely have a lot more to do with politics then law.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I don't know if you can legitimately claim to be puzzled unless you haven't done any research into the event. Perhaps this would be of use.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33265.pdf

It gives a lot of information on the logan act which was specifically put into law to prevent things like what Pelosi has done. It will give you the full history and purpose of the act.

As to why there haven't been charges that would be more a matter of politics. Pelosi is a powerful political figure... you don't file charges unless you know that you can win both legally and fend off her political supporters.

I would imagine that charges are being contemplated but whether they are ever filed or not will likely have a lot more to do with politics then law.
Thank you! I'm well aware of the 'scratch my back and I'll scratch your back' style of D.C. Liars, cheats, thieves and the corrupt do not accuse others of being liars, cheats, thieves and corrupt. Right? That seems to be your message.

So then, why all the fuss about Pelosi's trip to Syria? Afterall, Bush is not about to condone blatant law-breaking, is he? And, when nothing happens or will happen to punish the law-breaker, is the president then breaking the law? Should we correct this matter by 'going' after the president?
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
If you know it's illegal and illegal for a very valid reason... then why shouldn't their be a "fuss"? Certainly the real problem is that the political situation allows people to get away with things like this. Which is in large part my point. This is not an attack on democrats or a defense of republicans or vice versa. It is me pointing out that things have gotten out of hand and this sort of thing hurts EVERYONE.

Stop sniping others long enough to realize that we have a mutual interest in keeping order and seeing that these rules are followed. What would you say if a democrat president was in office and a delegation of republicans went to a foreign power and undermined his foreign policy?


It's not only dangerous but it's illegal. To say that you are puzzled about charges and then don't know why their is a fuss can only mean so many things. It could be as I initially assumed that you didn't know the law and didn't know she had done. It seems I was in error and you in fact did know the law and did know what she had done... but for some reason don't seem to think the law is valid and don't seem to see a problem with a political rival who under the seperation of powers specifically does NOT have authority over US foreign policy attempting to negociate with foriegn powers in direct contradiction of the executive's policy.



Would you have a problem if the president raised taxes without any input from congress? Or how about the president deciding a supreme court case?


This is a seperation of powers issue. Pelosi is making a power grab from the executive. You might agree with her policy or disagree with the president's. that doesn't change that fact and it doesn't make it "ok". It's a consitituational issue.


I assume... or should I say have hope that you believe in the constitution and the seperation of powers. If you do not then I don't expect you to either understand or agree with any US law or policy as you'll be entirely too estranged to it in general.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If you know it's illegal and illegal for a very valid reason... then why shouldn't their be a "fuss"? Certainly the real problem is that the political situation allows people to get away with things like this. Which is in large part my point. This is not an attack on democrats or a defense of republicans or vice versa. It is me pointing out that things have gotten out of hand and this sort of thing hurts EVERYONE.

Stop sniping others long enough to realize that we have a mutual interest in keeping order and seeing that these rules are followed. What would you say if a democrat president was in office and a delegation of republicans went to a foreign power and undermined his foreign policy?

It's not only dangerous but it's illegal. To say that you are puzzled about charges and then don't know why their is a fuss can only mean so many things. It could be as I initially assumed that you didn't know the law and didn't know she had done. It seems I was in error and you in fact did know the law and did know what she had done... but for some reason don't seem to think the law is valid and don't seem to see a problem with a political rival who under the seperation of powers specifically does NOT have authority over US foreign policy attempting to negociate with foriegn powers in direct contradiction of the executive's policy.

Would you have a problem if the president raised taxes without any input from congress? Or how about the president deciding a supreme court case?

This is a seperation of powers issue. Pelosi is making a power grab from the executive. You might agree with her policy or disagree with the president's. that doesn't change that fact and it doesn't make it "ok". It's a consitituational issue.

I assume... or should I say have hope that you believe in the constitution and the seperation of powers. If you do not then I don't expect you to either understand or agree with any US law or policy as you'll be entirely too estranged to it in general.
Well stated!

You and I and the public agree with the philosophy you espouse! That's the way it should be - but, it ISN'T - and, never will be!

I spent time in D.C. I learned about the disrepute held by the representatives of our branches of government for our democratic system. Yeah! They know how to MOUTH the good words and salute the flag. But, that's about it. Then, GREED and CORRUPTION take over. Even those who arrive there to serve with noble thoughts in mind soon learn they can only get things done by lying, cheating, stealing and broad corruption. All that is an undeniable fact of life.

And, it ain't gonna change.
 
Top Bottom