Criticism Of Nancy Pelosi’s Trip To Syria Builds
It appears that Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Syria and the gaffs that ensued with Israel are so egregious that even the liberal newspapers have to report it. They tried to hold out and report this trip as a step toward middle east peace. They were hoping that she would be able to embarrass the president and show that appeasement is the way to treat terrorists such as the leader of Syria.
Unfortunately Nancy Pelosi lied to Syria about peace talks with Israel, angering one of our biggest allies. And she actually committed a felony by traveling to Syria and conducting foreign policy against the will of the president.
All this has led to liberal papers having to come out and denounce Nancy Pelosi, you know it had to be hard on them.
Maybe these liberals aren’t as smart as they think they are.
America's Watchtower 
I wonder if the Republican congressmen visiting Syria also “committed a felony.”
LikeLike
It is not a problem to visit Syria as an individual. It is a problem to go to Syria and conduct foreign policy against the will of the president.
LikeLike
The president is not a king. He doesn’t have the authority to \ tell Congress or an individual congressman what they are allowed to do or who they are allowed to meet with.
Congress makes foreign policy, not the president.
LikeLike
Israel is our ally? What have they ever done for us?
LikeLike
The Logan Act makes it a felony and provides for a prison sentence of up to three years for any American, “without authority of the United States,” to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government’s behavior on any “disputes or controversies with the United States.”
The Supreme Court has spoken clearly on this aspect of the separation of powers. In Marbury v. Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall used the president’s authority over the Department of State as an illustration of those “important political powers” that, “being entrusted to the executive, the decision of the executive is conclusive.” And in the landmark 1936 Curtiss-Wright case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed: “Into the field of negotiation the Senate cannot intrude, and Congress itself is powerless to invade it.”
Ms. Pelosi and her Congressional entourage spoke to President Assad on various issues, among other things saying, “We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace.” She is certainly not the first member of Congress–of either party–to engage in this sort of behavior, but her position as a national leader, the wartime circumstances, the opposition to the trip from the White House, and the character of the regime she has chosen to approach make her behavior particularly inappropriate.
LikeLike
In his interview with Rush Limbaugh, the Vice President (before disagreeing with Pelosi), said, “Obviously, she’s the Speaker of the House and ought to travel to foreign nations and ought to conduct visits.”
She can talk all she wants. She is the third-in-line to the Presidency, after all, and serves the US well by being personally familiar with world leaders, even if the President disagrees with which world leaders he’d like for her to talk. And sharing her opinions on world situations is not the same as making policy.
Bottom line on this: Unless it can be shown without artifice that she was making official policy that is, committing the US government to a position or a course of action the claim that her action is illegal is more zeal than reason.
LikeLike
She went over there with congressman Tom Lantos who said ” we have an alternative Democrat foreign policy.” Are we not supposed to take them at their word?
LikeLike
I would guess most congress members have their own take on foreign policy, regardless of party affiliation. So yes, take them at their word. The fact that they showed up in Syria at all indicates that their position on foreign policy is significantly different than that of the President.
But, my goodness, is having a “Democrat foreign policy” against the law?
No, having one’s own foreign policy – even having it in another country – is not what violates the law.
The question is still: Is there any evidence that they made commitments on behalf of the US Gov’t that they were not authorized to make?
LikeLike
loud mouthed nancy pelosi “i,ll tear their face off should be tried on felony charges! as harry reeds assinine comment about bush not being the king of this country neither is this this liberal [to the extreme] the dictator that she would love to be. i plan on doing everthig i can [contacting representatives etc, to see that she is tried on felony charges.
LikeLike
i see that my message was deliberately full or misspellings and errors. this is a common occurence when the people that you are going through dont agree with you. i incur this problem quite frequently with letters to the editor of my local newspaper
LikeLike