Posted on 04/07/2007 12:43:32 PM PDT by ricks_place
Edited on 04/07/2007 8:05:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Wearing her scarf of female submission, US Democrat Speaker of the House entered Islamic Syria during the week prior to Easter. Many of us were surprised that she didn't don a full burqa. Speaking for the new US Democrat Shadow Government, after her talks with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Pelosi told Syria's President Bashar al-Assad (and the worldwide press) that Israel was "ready to engage in peace talks" with the terrorist nation. Wow! All it took was a woman (as a strong side note-women are considered to be below beasts of burden in fundamentalist Islamic-run countries) to settle the problems in the Middle East. If only we'd tried this sooner the world could have avoided all of the bloodshed and wars that have been ongoing for multiple decades between Israel and terrorist Islamic countries!
The only problem with San-Fran-Nan's proud proclamation is that Israel's position has not changed from that which it held before Madame Pelosi began her Middle Eastern Peace-at-any-cost Tour. After Pelosi had, essentially, announced to the world that she had virtually and single-handedly begun the end to all crises in the Middle East, the Olmert administration said that until Syria stopped its support of terrorist groups (which include Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad) there would be no peace talks. Olmert's office also issued the statement: "What was communicated to the US House speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel." But, the intrepid, if clueless, first female Speaker of the US House of Representatives continues to plow onward-paying no attention to reality. In fact, this is yet another blatant attempt of the Democrats to establish their alternative foreign courses of action-in opposition to official United States foreign policy. This latest Democrat action speaks loudly and surely of another infamous appeaser-Neville Chamberlain.
Why would Pelosi and her supporting and ongoing leftist Democrat-sponsored attempted coup of the US presidency engage in such right-next-to-treasonous (and in defiance of the 1799 Logan Act) behaviors? I believe there is a very simple, if not atrocious, answer. Just as Democrats (and some RINOs) work diligently to garner the votes of illegal aliens, Ms. Pelosi seems bound and determined to now win the hearts and minds-and votes-of the terrorist factions within the USA.
Thanks for the comments.
You’re quite welcome.
Joe Wilson and his “secret” wife serve the shadow government. As do the attorneys that were dismissed.
The government is infested with them and Bush was wrong not to clean house at the State Department.
With these people running the Nation there will soon be no more Easter Sunday Services. We will all be Muslims or dead. Wake-up America.
Isn't this treason? It is one thing to discuss alternatives within our own congressional halls, it is completely another to actually go out and establish their alternative foreign courses . She/they did this without the approval of the people, which is represented by Congress.
Any presidential candidate should be eyed with their promise to clean house of the leftists.
In the 1950’s and early 1960’s the agriculture department was essentially a communist party shop. Nobody did anything.
The problem with Guiliani (a fact not a bash) is his past connection to the DOJ. DOJ lawyers tend to stick together as a club.
In the lead up to the war, there were faux resignations from state department career diplomats who were close to retirement. Those were not about the war, those were about their careers that no chance for promotion.
Just because a lawyer is a prosecutor does not make them less of a leftist. Actually just the opposit.
Title 18 § 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments
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.
Notice that Nancy Pelosi has "the authority of the United States" ~ comes with the job eh.
Not defending this mindless twit in what she was doing, but the Logan Act specifically exempts every last single Congresscritter in its second clause.
I don’t know why PeLosi,Reid<Schullner,et al seem to think they can run rough shod on foreign policy,but the way they’re going there is going to be a disaster,and they won’t be able to blame the President or any Republicans.
Nancy and the others know that they have nothing to worry about. The Republicans do not have the guts to prosecute them.
Not really. Congress has legislative powers, not executive authority.
Neither does the Chief Justice have Legislative powers, nor Executive authority.
Otherwise, Congress' power to investigate, etc., et al, is unlimited except to the extent they, themselves, agree to limit it.
The guys who wrote the Logan Act had no interest in tieing their hands in the future should their friend not be in the White House.
Well there is that little thing called the Justice Department, exercised in Abscam (Murtha), and with Randy Cunningham.
If it was me, I would appoint a special prosecutor, say, Fitzpatrick, to investigate Pelosi to see if she had violated said act.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.