The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 [1948]) is a single federal statute making it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.
Congress established the Logan Act in 1799, less than one year after passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts, which authorized the arrest and deportation of aliens and prohibited written communication defamatory to the U.S. government. The 1799 act was named after Dr. George Logan. A prominent Republican and Quaker from Pennsylvania, Logan did not draft or introduce the legislation that bears his name, but was involved in the political climate that precipitated it.
In the late 1790s, a French trade embargo and jailing of U.S. seamen created animosity and unstable conditions between the United States and France. Logan sailed to France in the hope of presenting options to its government to improve relations with the United States and quell the growing anti-French sentiment in the United States. France responded by lifting the embargo and releasing the captives. Logan's return to the United States was marked by Republican praise and Federalist scorn. To prevent U.S. citizens from interfering with negotiations between the United States and foreign governments in the future, the Adams administration quickly introduced the bill that would become the Logan Act.
The Logan Act has remained almost unchanged and unused since its passage. The act is short and reads as follows:
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.
The language of the act appears to encompass almost every communication between a U.S. citizen and a foreign government considered an attempt to influence negotiations between their two countries. Because the language is so broad in scope, legal scholars and judges have suggested that the Logan Act is unconstitutional. Historically, the act has been used more as a threat to those engaged in various political activities than as a weapon for prosecution. In fact, Logan Act violations have been discussed in almost every administration without any serious attempt at enforcement, and to date there have been no convictions and only one recorded indictment.
One example of the act's use as a threat of prosecution involved the Reverend Jesse Jackson. (Another self-promoting Liberal only interested in personal and party power and profit?! Say it ain't so! :rofl ) In 1984 Jackson took well-publicized trips to Cuba and Nicaragua and returned with several Cuban political prisoners seeking asylum in the United States. PresidentRonald Reagan stated that Jackson's activities may have violated the law, but Jackson was not pursued beyond a threat.
The only Logan Act indictment occurred in 1803. It involved a Kentucky newspaper article that argued for the formation in the western United States of a separate nation allied to France. No prosecution followed.
the act appears to encompass almost every communication between a U.S. citizen and a foreign government considered an attempt to influence negotiations between their two countries.
Thats horribly unconstitutional. I've talked to the King of Tonga a few times, thereby putting me in violation of such a pathetic excuse for a law. It should be repealed immediately with something that is specific in its scope. If you want to attack Pelosi for conducting unauthorized negotiations, thats fine. However, you need to find evidence to support such allegations.
Logan Act: Logan Act: Information from Answers.com
The Logan Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 953 [1948]) is a single federal statute making it a crime for a citizen to confer with foreign governments against the interests of the United States. Specifically, it prohibits citizens from negotiating with other nations on behalf of the United States without authorization.
Of course, as the Libs like to point out, if you commit a crime and are not prosecuted for it, technically (to them) you never committed a crime! :rofl
I guess Pelosi considers herself the approving authority required to grant HERSELF permission to negotiate with terrorist states! :roll: :doh
Pelosi was not confering against the interests of the US. What are you talking about?
Thats horribly unconstitutional. I've talked to the King of Tonga a few times, thereby putting me in violation of such a pathetic excuse for a law. It should be repealed immediately with something that is specific in its scope. If you want to attack Pelosi for conducting unauthorized negotiations, thats fine. However, you need to find evidence to support such allegations.
the act appears to encompass almost every communication between a U.S. citizen and a foreign government considered an attempt to influence negotiations between their two countries.
Also, I am unaware that the Tonga was a terrorist state that the United States declared, as part of our Foreign Policy, would not be negotiated with or visited, as has Syria!
she bragged about how she was going to negotiate peace talks regarding Israel, was going to try to negotiate a change in Syrian attitude and policy regarding Israel, and was going to try to get them to sit down to talks to work on a 'road to peace'.
You were negotiating on behalf of the U.S. government against U.S. interests? What's your job?
Pelosi was not confering against the interests of the US. What are you talking about?
On December 25, I arrived in Damascus, Syria. My 16th visit included my 4th meeting with President Bashar al-Assad.
Longtime Republican Senator Arlen Specter said he will visit Syria despite loud objections by the Bush administration, saying the situation in Iraq is so dire that it is time Congress step up to the plate and see what it can do.
Specter, who has been in the Senate for 26 years, said in an interview late Friday he is planning a trip to the Middle East that will include Israel and Syria. The senator said he and other Republicans are concerned that the administration's policies in the Middle East are not working and that other Republican members may follow him.
"I've talked to my Republican colleagues, and there is a disquiet here," Specter said.
Do you have any clue what those other delegations' missions are?
-Are they meeting with the President of the Terrorist State?
Have they gone on TV and announced to the world, as moronically as Pelosi has done, that she fully intends to violate established U.S. Foreign Policy by negotiating with the head of a terrorist state, thereby breaking the logan act of 1790?
Thats horribly unconstitutional. I've talked to the King of Tonga a few times,
thereby putting me in violation of such a pathetic excuse for a law.
It should be repealed immediately with something that is specific in its scope.
fIf you want to attack Pelosi
How is someone's pointing out that she could be in violation of a very long standing principle of our government "attacking" Pelosi. Is she untouchable, annoited and beyond criticism or something?
Pratfall in Damascus - washingtonpost.com
Pratfall in Damascus
Nancy Pelosi's foolish shuttle diplomacy
HOUSE SPEAKER Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) offered an excellent demonstration yesterday of why members of Congress should not attempt to supplant the secretary of state when traveling abroad. After a meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, Ms. Pelosi announced that she had delivered a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that "Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process" as well. Having announced this seeming diplomatic breakthrough, Ms. Pelosi suggested that her Kissingerian shuttle diplomacy was just getting started. :doh "We expressed our interest in using our good offices in promoting peace between Israel and Syria," she said.
Only one problem: The Israeli prime minister entrusted Ms. Pelosi with no such message. "What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel," said a statement quickly issued by the prime minister's office. In fact, Mr. Olmert told Ms. Pelosi that "a number of Senate and House members who recently visited Damascus received the impression that despite the declarations of Bashar Assad, there is no change in the position of his country regarding a possible peace process with Israel."
You are accusing her of breaking a law, which has been "Broken" by very high ranking members of the republican party without a comment at all from you.
Your entire argument is blatantly partisan,
You .............................
As tecoyah pointed out your outrage is quite partisan. If other Republicans violated the law it certainly does not excuse Nancy' as you correctly pointed out but you outrage has not been directed at them as well. It seems selective in your case. Once again how was senator Arlen Sectors actions any more "legal" ?
I see Nancy is ticking off the right people. Go Nancy! :rofl
WHOA! The very 1st line in my last post states that I believe the GOP members who met with Assad should be punished as well! But, as i pointed out, Pelosi went WAY beyond what these GOP members did!
She's ticking off Isreal too? I'm really starting to like this chick!
but only after we pointed out Republican party member's transgression. Your thread starter did not even begin to address that.
And yes, I like how Nancy is ******* off the right people
You, on the other hand, seem to think Pelosi is some kind of hero for breaking laws, criminally and fraudulently mis-representing not only her own country but others, displaying her ignorance to the world, being called a liar before the world, and aiding and abetting terrorists in their propoganda campaigns! THEREIN lies the REAL problem!
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?