Cheney P.O'd at Pelosi

[Mephisto]

Explain please the administrations work with North Korea (and the powers in Asia) and India on nuclear matters.

DR

And how long have we been in negotiations with NK? Who were the primary countries affecting that diplomacy? I quoted Sun Tsu in another thread, and I believe it makes PERFECT sense to keep your enemies closer than your friends - we should have been negotiating with L'il Kim all along, but as the saying goes; "The Power of Pride" kept us from doing so.

 

[Azure]

She's 67? Wow. . . (I'll keep the rest of that thought to myself)

She is an ugly bitch.

 

[firecoins]

Probably not, but she may be running afoul of the Logan act, except that I didn't see her trying to make any agreement with Syria. This line of thought/criticism of Speaker Pelosi looks a bit like more hot air, as to date it appears that no one has been prosecuted under the act. A Kentucky farmer was indicted in 1803, and Jesse Jackson was considered to have violated it by Ronald Reagan. (Bobby Goodman incident. Funnily enough, Syria was the country involved. Hassad's dad, for that matter. )

I heard a coffee break discussion on this matter today, and am scratching my head a bit. I look at the italicized part and assess that it would be pretty hard to prove in the case of Speaker Pelosi's recent trip to Syria.

DR

she isn't a member of the executive branch which is constitutionally set with foreign policy.

 

[Azure]

she isn't a member of the executive branch which is constitutionally set with foreign policy.

So you're saying Pelosi did not have the constitutional authority to travel to Syria and try to dictate foreign policy?

Seems correct to me. The legislative branch has no authority that way.

 

[SezMe]

Azure, your making a big assumption that she was trying to "dictate" foreign policy. Can you support that?

Hundreds (literally) of members of the legislative branch make junkets to foreign nations each year. What sets Pelosi's trip apart from all the others? I could argue that McCain in Iraq was doing a helluva lot more to shape foreign policy than Pelosi.

 

[Darth Rotor]

she isn't a member of the executive branch which is constitutionally set with foreign policy.

From post #2 in this thread, by me.

Her arrogating executive activity to herself as Speaker, without endorsement from the executive, is a legitimate beef from the executive branch. Her action smacks of "it's all about me, not about we" regarding US foreign policy. That's not so good

.
What I was referring to in 'hard to prove' (post # 22) is whether or not she was setting policy markers with her visit, or furthering other aims. If the former, then perhaps the Logan Act is applicable, but based on what little I know about the trip, in detail, from the media, I find little to show that she was negotiating or presenting in her visit matters of policy, which is indeed set by the executive branch.

From what I learned of the Logan Act, it is one thing to indict, quite another to prosecute, and another (as yet to ever occur) to convict under the Act's provisions, all of which require proof.

DR