Pelosi should be prosecuted... by Hero

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Along with U.S. House members Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt.

"'U.S. House members ... including Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt' met with Assad on April 1, (before Pelosi) saying 'they believed there was an opportunity for dialogue with the Syrian leadership.'"
http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200704050004

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:28 AM

ERIC

Quote:

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.

One of the 9/11 hijackers was Lebanese. Lebanon was at the time, and to a certain extent still is, an agent or subject of Syria. The case can be made that the diplomacy by the leader of the House is aimed at improving relations to the end of redressing the injury and preventing further injury.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:32 AM

DAYVE

And this:

Pitts in Syria before Pelosi_But county’s U.S. rep. draws less criticism__By Dave Pidgeon, Staff_Intelligencer Journal
http://local.lancasteronline.com/4/202433

Published: Apr 03, 2007 1:43 AM EST

LANCASTER COUNTY, Pa. - While U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's upcoming visit to Syria has caused the White House to bristle, a little-publicized rendezvous took place Sunday between Syria's president and Lancaster County's congressman.

And though Bush administration officials have been criticizing Pelosi, it's not clear what role the White House and the U.S. Department of State played when U.S. Rep. Joe Pitts and two other Republican congressmen met with Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Pitts is a Chester County Republican who represents Lancaster County.

Gabe Neville, Pitts' chief of staff, said Monday the conference between Assad and the three Republicans was intended to be "low profile."

"It was done in cooperation with the administration," he said.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 5:58 AM

...and that Republican Issa guy mentioned in the other thread. Him, too?

And she accomplished SO MUCH while she was there-- probably incited the next 9/11 attack.

But that's OK-- this is handy- now the right wingers can hang the " Nancy the Traitor " sign around her neck for the rest of her career.

And she associated with *S*Y*R*I*A*N*S-- terrorists. Their evil influence and opposition to right thinking, good American values might cause her to try to end the War in Iraq, or maybe not support the troops.

( Oh yeah, that was happening already. )

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 6:06 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

This is so far off the wall and mis-directed at first I thought it was ironic. Because, well, everything you said about Pelosi can also be said about repubicans, and, well - they did it first! Then I realized it was serious. DUDE -

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 6:39 AM

Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity or problems from anybody. It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 6:59 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I'm just saying if you want to prosecute Pelosi you have to prosecute everybody who did the same thing (oh, and who happened to do it first, but without the outcry from people like you

). Don't know how that make repubicans especially picked-on.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:04 AM

Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:12 AM

Personally, I'd love to see a steel-cage brawl between Pelosi & Rice....probably would be biggest pay-per-view in history. They could create pre-fight buzz by just ratcheting up the usual rhetoric & name-calling, and have it all culminate in a no-holds barred match....ooooh baby; the hair pulling, the eye scratching, the groin kicking, the swearing...it'd be a blast!...what?...OK yes Pelosi is a lot older than Rice...so let's give Pelosi a partner...a 2-to-1 tag-team event...and her partner...none other than the formidable pillar of strength and inner fortitude, the Honorable Harry Reid.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:14 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

What does this

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

have to do with this?

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity or problems from anybody. It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

Just trying to find a point here we can discuss, but your's seem to be all over the map.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:19 AM

There's nothing to discuss... I think they're all vile assholes...all putting their personal ambitions and causes ahead of the good of the country.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:24 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"they're all vile assholes" I'm wondering, does this include repubicans? I'm really curious. Your post was ambiguous.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:30 AM

KANEMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"they're all vile assholes" I'm wondering, does this include repubicans? I'm really curious. Your post was ambiguous.

I get what he's saying. What is the problem Ruse? Is the word 'all' really that ambiguous?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Your post was ambiguous.

All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:54 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't know if you meant "all" democrats or "all" everybody.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 9:48 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
It's only being a Republican now that's illegal.

OMG, he's been reading Ann Coulter again. She wrote a column with that exact title ( and with just as little basis in fact ) about a month ago.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 9:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
Pelosi is a Democrat...that means she can do and say whatever she wants without any impunity

I think Shiny oughtta either go back to English class , or buy a dictionary.

" Without any impunity " the way he uses it here means the opposite of what he obviously intends.

"With impunity" means without worrying about consequences or punishment.

To quote ( directly ) Jayne Cobb, " nice Move, dumbass."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 9:55 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Pelosi cannot be and won't be prosecuted...that is pretty ridiculous. However, someone who by her postion, is 2 heartbeats away from being The President should at least show a scintilla of respect for the office.

[ Somebody who is zero hearbeats away from the Presidency should show some respect for the Office, too.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 11:13 AM

This thread is(was)about the legality of Pelosi's actions. Instead we have posters saying 'what about the republicans' and grammer critique.

Are Pelosi's actions okay with all of the responders thus far, or will you all continue to 'change the goalposts' instead of discussing the topic at hand? I guess the right and left have more in common than people think.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 11:24 AM

KANEMAN

This ugly fucking American hating bitch should be hung up by her clit, slapped in her titties, and ass-fucked with the neck of a guitar...Just my opinion.....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 12:13 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
This thread is(was)about the legality of Pelosi's actions.

I read the post. Pelosi was on nothing more than a fact-finding mission, not illegal by any means. But if you want to CLAIM it's illegal then you also have to look to equal application of the law. B/c applying a law unequally is illegal. So the actions of repubicans becomes relevant.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 12:20 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I'm just saying if you want to prosecute Pelosi you have to prosecute everybody who did the same thing (oh, and who happened to do it first, but without the outcry from people like you ). Don't know how that make repubicans especially picked-on.

Only they didn't do the same thing. Pelosi was asked specifically NOT to go, and she introduced her OWN policy with a foreign nantion, contrary to that of the Presidents. It's my understanding that the GOP group that went were still touting official US policy, that of the President. If they weren't, then yes, censure them all, and possibly prosecute as well. But from what I'd heard, the 2 cases are not the same, so the actions toward them should not be the same either.

As for the claims that Pelosi et al were merely on a 'fact finding' mission, that's like saying Sandy Burger thought he was at a public library when he 'checked out' those secret documents. It's total bunk, is what it is. She was attempting to play the role of Sec of State, and envoy and dimplomat between the US, Israel and Syria. She's none of that, she's the Speaker of the House. The sooner she starts acting like that, the better.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 12:30 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"The tour was part of the congressional delegation's first full day in Jerusalem, the first stop on their fact-finding trip to the Middle East. The group arrived here Friday."
You seem so sure that Pelosi is doing something more than fact-finding. Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.

"BUSH: We have made it clear to high-ranking officials, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, that going to Syria sends mixed signals -- signals in the region and, of course, mixed signals to President Assad."
Republicans were also not supposed to go, despite your claim that they were an exception. Please post some link to explain your claim.

"a Republican-led delegation that met with Assad in Damascus on April 1."
Repulicans did meet with Assad despite Bush's explicit disapproval, AND they went there before Pelosi. Please explain 1) why you didn't make an issue out of it when it happened and 2) why repubicans should not be prosecuted.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 1:04 PM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by ShinyEd:
All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

Once again I agree ShinyEd. Both parties have betrayed thier principles and hired focus groups to find out what we want to hear, not what's right! Being in office and having fancy jets to fly around in is way more important than doing the right thing. When a Republican wins an election it means that the voters approve of that Republican's political agenda, and he or she should act within those principles. Same goes for Democrats. You know what, people like Shawn Hannity and Bill OReilly make me wanna puke every day. So I know how the dems must make you feel. The problem is simple, the Military Industrial Complex is no longer the threat. The Media Political Complex is. I could get a lot shittier today but it's Easter weekend.

Best to you and yours!

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 2:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.

Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria with a message of peace carried on behalf of the Isreali govt. There was no such message, it was not her place to deliver it if there was.

She further offered herself as a go between for the two nations in these new peace negotiations.

Both of these acts on her part created new foriegn policy and contravened existing policy and sought to commit the United States government to a position it was not prepared to take. It was a huge blunder that was aimed at influencing our relations with both Syria and Isreal and it was done after being specifically warned against such action by the President.

Rather then send the message that the United States wanted a new direction in policy, which I believe was her intent (and bad enough it was), she has sent the message that the United States has a Speaker of the House who is ingnorant and foolish. She should resign her post if not her seat.

Edited to add: Even though she broke the Logan Act, I think that losing her position in the govt is sufficient penalty for her error.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 2:29 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria with a message of peace carried on behalf of the Isreali govt. There was no such message, it was not her place to deliver it if there was.

She further offered herself as a go between for the two nations in these new peace negotiations."

I haven't been keeping up with the news. Care to post a link?

OK - here is what I got from the Jerusalem Post:

"I will send a message to the president of Syria from the families of the soldiers and from the Cohen family as well ..."

No peace dialogue here, no negotiations, no nothing.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 2:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I haven't been keeping up with the news. Care to post a link?

What? Its been all over the news for a week.

http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908
and
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173879247562&pagename=JPos
t%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
and
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007
040402306.html
and here's where they took her for a ride:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OA3KBG0&show_article=1
and my favorite:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-04-04-pelosi-syria_N.htm?csp=3
4

There's tons more.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 2:49 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

No silly, not opinion, I mean actual NEWS of what Pelosi DID and SAID. From the speeches I've read (various parts of her one speech to the Knesset), she touched on nothing at all but her individual feelings and the family tragedy of the soldiers.

I mean really, if you think she should be prosecuted, don't you think she should have actually, well, DONE something illegal? Or do YOU base your prosecutions on other people's opinions of what someone might do in the future?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 2:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
No silly, not opinion, I mean actual NEWS of what Pelosi DID and SAID. From the speeches I've read (various parts of her one speech to the Knesset), she touched on nothing at all but her individual feelings and the family tragedy of the soldiers.

Yeah, might want to click on all FIVE links. Take them bottom up.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:03 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

""Israel was ready to engage in peace talks" with Syria. What's more, she added, Mr. Assad was ready to "resume the peace process"

Now see, when I see VERY short snippets of quotes it makes me think that all the qualifiers and caveats had been expunged, and maybe even a few important words as well. Let's take this as an example: Explaining the supposed blunder as a misunderstanding Hero said: "Pelosi saw fit to open a new dialogue with Syria" and "send the message that the United States wanted a new direction in policy". Cool.

So, would YOU want to be prosecuted on 12 highly selected words taken out of context? Personally, I don't think you have a case. And you're just blowing so much hot air.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:31 PM

SEVENPERCENT

Quote:
And you're just blowing so much hot air.

It's Hero. Nothing unusual there.

------------------------------------------
"A revolution without dancing is no revolution at all." - V

Anyone wanting to continue a discussion off board is welcome to email me - check bio for details.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 3:53 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
All means all.
Bush & gang have fucked up the Republican party, betrayed all Conservative principles; and have been un-bearably negligent, excrutiatingly inept and incompetent, and antagonistically arrogant in almost all their efforts.
And the Dems...well they just make me wanna puke every day.

Agreed.
So why y'all get pissed at me when I point this out ?

Pelosi's an idiot, but we knew that, and my stance is to bench all these incompetents, including her, and get some REAL foreign policy folk on the job instead of politically connected nimrods like Bolton and company.

We need shysters and snake oil salesman at this point, cause that's one hell of an ugly pig we're trying to put lipstick on right about now.

And if yer gonna talk politics via cage-match, I think imma lay my bet on Jesse Ventura.. experience counts

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:01 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Yup.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:37 PM

SOUPCATCHER

* footsteps approaching a sign in the road *

"Pelosi should be prosecuted..."

* hammering, nailing, assorted other busy sounds *

"Pelosi should be persecuted..."

* footsteps fading off into the sunset, whistling *

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 4:51 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA !!!

So, how are you doing Soupcatcher?

..... Though I've been pondering this topic some more. All is not as it seems. I suspect it's being severely misreported in the US. If Pelosi had committed a major blunder, her speech would not have been so well-received in the Knesset. Like Gore's 'inventing' the internet, Dean's 'scream', and Chavez's sulfur speech before the UN, I'd put good money on there being no substance to this story.

Do you think there'll be any takers?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, April 6, 2007 7:14 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"The tour was part of the congressional delegation's first full day in Jerusalem, the first stop on their fact-finding trip to the Middle East. The group arrived here Friday."

Who wrote that line? And so what ? The fact is, Ms Pelosi relayed an alleged message from Israel to Syria, making her an diplomat by default. She's no diplomat.

Quote:
You seem so sure that Pelosi is doing something more than fact-finding. Please post what has been actually DONE that exceeds the scope of fact-finding.
Tom Lantos specifically said they were there to present the DEMOCRATIC views on certain issues

The initiative offers Israel peace with all Arab states if it withdraws from lands seized in 1967 and allows the creation of a Palestinian state with its capital in east Jerusalem. Israel has said it would only accept the proposal if some changes were made - particularly over the issue of refugees - but Arab nations have said Israel should accept it as a basis for negotiations.

"I explained to him that this can be a very important and historic proposal if he is prepared for a discussion and a dialogue and not a presentation on a take-it-or-leave-it basis," Lantos told the Associated Press. "His reaction was very positive."

Quote:
"BUSH: We have made it clear to high-ranking officials, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, that going to Syria sends mixed signals -- signals in the region and, of course, mixed signals to President Assad."
Republicans were also not supposed to go, despite your claim that they were an exception. Please post some link to explain your claim.

"a Republican-led delegation that met with Assad in Damascus on April 1."
Repulicans did meet with Assad despite Bush's explicit disapproval, AND they went there before Pelosi. Please explain 1) why you didn't make an issue out of it when it happened and 2) why repubicans should not be prosecuted.

If they did the same thing as Pelosi et al did, which is present an alternate foreign policy than that of the White House, then yes. Censure or prosecute away.

People love a happy ending. So every episode, I will explain once again that I don't like people. And then Mal will shoot someone. Someone we like. And their puppy. - Joss

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 9:26 AM

SOUPCATCHER

Hey Rue, I'm doing pretty well. Crossing my fingers that the sun will break through the cloud cover this afternoon. There's some tantalizing snatches of clear blue in the off-white sky.

Yeah, I don't think there's much substance to this story either. I remember, back when I was a rightwinger, thinking that Speaker Gingrich going around the world talking to world leaders and directly contradicting and talking shit about executive office foreign policy was a good thing. As far as I can tell, Speaker Pelosi isn't contradicting the administration's foreign policy, because there really isn't one. So she's getting slammed for doing less than what Speaker Gingrich was praised for. Typical.

We're going to be treated to a lot of these outrages-of-the-week over the next two years. TeddySanFran did a nice post yesterday on the GOP Representative in charge of propaganda against the Democratic Party. Here's my favorite part, in reference to the manufactured "airplane controversy:"

Quote:
exerpted from http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/06/putnams-speakerair-fiction-airbr
ushed-by-wapo/
{Adam} Putnam's most famous "jump & exploit" was sounding the alarm when the new Speaker requested a giant airplane that included waterbeds, an open bar, three IMAX screens, and room for the entire San Francisco Pride Parade to march up and down the aisle bare-assed in leather chaps and feather boas. Except, of course, that SpeakerAir was, well — kinda made up. Adam Putnam later admitted to the Tampa Tribune that the truth did not matter:

They'll keep trying until they can find something that resonates (such as the Dean scream or the Gore fake quote). That's the beauty of the shit-flinging strategy, there are Republicans out there willing to crap in their hands and heave it at Speaker Pelosi and it only takes one bullseye.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 4:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:

That's the beauty of the shit-flinging strategy, there are Republicans out there willing to crap in their hands and heave it at Speaker Pelosi and it only takes one bullseye.

Sorta,
"Ye'll take the high road,
and I'll take the low road,
and I'll be in the White House
afore ye," huh?
My apologies to Bobbie Burns.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, April 7, 2007 8:14 PM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Sorta,
"Ye'll take the high road,
and I'll take the low road,
and I'll be in the White House
afore ye," huh?
My apologies to Bobbie Burns.

You sure that was Burns? I thought it was more of a folk song, author unknown, referring to the singer's upcoming execution (his spirit would take the low road back to Scotland while his living buddy would be taking the high - above ground - road). At least that's what the tour guide told us as we drove along the shore of Loch Lomond. Of course, like pretty much anything that any tour guide has ever uttered, it's probably best to take that with a grain of salt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 10:10 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

I was thinking about this. You know, if the Democrats were smart (one can only hope), they'd investigate the hell out of Pelosi's trip. I mean in great and painful detail. With all the 'who said what to whom and when's that don't get covered in the news.

In fact, they'd investigate the hell out of every claim made by the right-wingnuts, early and often.

It would make the right-wingnuts look like the boy who cried wolf. After a while, not only would these claims not get any traction, the claimants would lose all crediility on any topic.

One can only hope.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 11:59 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Quote:

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government

See! You're a lawyer Hero, you know of the MANY ways to interpret the law. The way this reads...it just means she can't write letters or have sex with them. And she hasn't done either of those things yet.

I'm telling ya straight up...I've been to Syria, the men there are pigs, just like in Turkey and Iraq, I've been there for extended visits too. Try to grasp this concept. Arab men don't listen to women. They will use them to neener neener George Bush, but that's it. She didn't hurt anything, nor did she accomplish anything when she was there. You've been sucked into this absolute trash about how her visit hurts us over there. It doesn't matter!

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 12:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
See! You're a lawyer Hero, you know of the MANY ways to interpret the law. The way this reads...it just means she can't write letters or have sex with them. And she hasn't done either of those things yet.

Intercourse, PA...home of the Amish.

I'm fairly certain that the legislative intent of the statute was not sexual relations.

As for Pelosi, she certainly bent over let the Syrians...you know and figuratively speaking and all...

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
Arab men don't listen to women. They will use them to neener neener George Bush, but that's it. She didn't hurt anything, nor did she accomplish anything when she was there. You've been sucked into this absolute trash about how her visit hurts us over there. It doesn't matter!

Than why was Pelosi there? It has to be more than just a taxpayer funded holiday.

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, April 10, 2007 1:42 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Fact-finding mission, like many others have done before and will do after.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:11 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by BigDamnNobody:
Than why was Pelosi there? It has to be more than just a taxpayer funded holiday.

When you're an extremeist (not saying you are for sure) you run the risk of missing the positive intent of your opposite. From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria, or as RUE said, "a fact finding mission". Basically getting things rolling.

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

Everyone is trying to do good here, and hey! Drum up a little good publicity for your party too?, why not.

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

"The world is still turning and you're on it....count yourself lucky" My Dad, 2007.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria...

Thats an argument to make in the halls of the US Congress, not in the Dictator's throne room in Damascus.

Quote:

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

Your first statement "normalizing relations" is directly contradictory to the second one you make. In essence Pelosi is substituting her foriegn policy for the President's and against his express intention.

I note for the record that Gingrich was accused, rightfully so, of the same thing. He said on a trip to Taiwan that the US would defend Taiwan. He admitted his mistake and said that such a statement, while an accurate reflection of US law was contrary to Clinton policy (which was to downplay the law and our commitment to avoid provoking a negative defensive reaction from China thereby setting back relations).

Pelosi goes beyond a mere restatement of existing US law, she created her own policy and tried to commit the United States to a particular position in regards to both Syria and Isreal.

Quote:

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

There are traditional remedies for this kind of thing. A rebuke of and apology from Pelosi (ala Gingrich). Censure. Loss of her Speakership, resignation. All are non-criminal penalties that fit this particular crime by making it less criminal and more of a lapse in judgement. I think any of these would be acceptable...unless she goes to Iran.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:53 AM

CHRISISALL

Ahh yes. When Republicans do wrong all is covered by plausable deniability and spin. When Democrats do wrong we need to see punishment.

And poor little Georgie couldn't ORDER Pelosi not to go because.....?

This is all very entertaining.

Politics as usual Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 5:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malbadinlatin:
When you're an extremeist (not saying you are for sure) you run the risk of missing the positive intent of your opposite. From the Dem's point of view, Speaker Pelosi was doing something that needs to be done...Normalizing relations with Syria, or as RUE said, "a fact finding mission". Basically getting things rolling.

First Pelosi accomplished nothing with her visit, now she is getting the ball rolling. So which is it? Is she 'normalizing relations with Syria (diplomatic trip) or is she simply finding facts? And what facts is she finding? Besides Israel does not trust Syria and vice versa.

Quote:

The Administration wants to hold back on opening negotiations, till Syria "shapes up". They are waiting for a time where Syria acts responsibly concerning the aid and comfort they give to anti US terrorists in all the many forms.

That is the basis of this entire thread. Should Speaker Pelosi be going against the mandate of the present Administration?

Quote:

Everyone is trying to do good here, and hey! Drum up a little good publicity for your party too?, why not.

Just who is getting all the good publicity from this? Besides Syria that is.

Quote:

If we are going to prosecute politicians for every law we think they've broken, Hero is going to be up waaaay past his bedtime if he is the type of attorney that would try them. You'd have to drag every last one of them into court.

This thread is about the legality of Pelosi's actions. But all politicians who break the law should be dragged to court or else why have a legal system in the first place?

Posting to stir stuff up.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, April 11, 2007 6:05 AM