So it's ok for one elected official (Bush) to do it but not another (Pelosi)?
Except when they do.... the Bush Administration will NOT visit, negotiate, or work with TERRORIST Regimes...
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.
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.
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a hippo down main street - it hasn't been used, but it still a LAW that, as long as it is on the books and has not been repealed, it is STILL a LAW.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.
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!
Ah, then it is unlikely that bush will act upon it.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.
Interesting... I wonder if bush has the balls to push the logan act...
the irony of the new Democrat 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...
not going to happen... they have a majority of the congress and if anything want to impeach Bush.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.
who were put in office by democrats that are generally pretty hostile to the administration.She was not put in there by voters, she was put in there by the Democrats in the House, they should remove her.
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 think it quite horrific the political games they have been playing, dangerous political games.
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.
who were put in office by democrats that are generally pretty hostile to the administration.
I would argue that the US's political system is starting to unravel because of all this rep, Democrat, 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.
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.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.
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 are they Republicans doing that to the Dems?
Bush hasn't. He's president. Presidents typically don't directly engage stuff like that. However allied forces do.How has Bush disrespected Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid versus the vile rhetoric and bogus accusations they have engaged in?
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.
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.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.
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.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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?