Should Nancy Pelosi be charged under the Logan Act?

Question

for advocating her own personal foreign policy towards terrorist states such as Syria.

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.

Answer 1

I believe she should in fact be charged under the Logan act. Whether she will or not is another question all together. If you were to believe some of the Liberal answers given to this question she should be let off the hook, but look at this answer from the Michael Reagan website:

"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." Some background on this statute helps to understand why Ms. Pelosi may be in serious trouble.

President John Adams requested the statute after a Pennsylvania pacifist named George Logan traveled to France in 1798 to assure the French government that the American people favored peace in the undeclared "Quasi War" being fought on the high seas between the two countries. In proposing the law, Rep. Roger Griswold of Connecticut explained that the object was, as recorded in the Annals of Congress, "to punish a crime which goes to the destruction of the executive power of the government. He meant that description of crime which arises from an interference of individual citizens in the negotiations of our executive with foreign governments."

The debate on this bill ran nearly 150 pages in the Annals. On Jan. 16, 1799, Rep. Isaac Parker of Massachusetts explained, "the people of the United States have given to the executive department the power to negotiate with foreign governments, and to carry on all foreign relations, and that it is therefore an usurpation of that power for an individual to undertake to correspond with any foreign power on any dispute between the two governments, or for any state government, or any other department of the general government, to do it.""
It does not matter that she is the Speaker of the House. That alone does not give her the authority to go speak with Assad. The EXECUTIVE Branch has been given the "power to negotiate with foreign governments, and to carry on all foreign relations." That means that POTUS Bush alone has the authority to grant someone the right to negotiate with a foreign government.

Again from the Michael Reagan website: "But consider this statement by Albert Gallatin, the future Secretary of the Treasury under President Thomas Jefferson, who was wary of centralized government: "it would be extremely improper for a member of this House to enter into any correspondence with the French Republic . . . As we are not at war with France, an offence of this kind would not be high treason, yet it would be as criminal an act, as if we were at war . . . ." Indeed, the offense is greater when the usurpation of the president's constitutional authority is done by a member of the legislature -- all the more so by a Speaker of the House -- because it violates not just statutory law but constitutes a usurpation of the powers of a separate branch and a breach of the oath of office Ms. Pelosi took to support the Constitution."
In this instance France is mentioned because we were at odds with them then like we are with Syria now.

Also just because other Senators 'visited' Syria does not mean the broke the law. And YES if they did visit with the Syrian government and try to influence them, and they did it without approval they SHOULD be charged whether they are Republican or Democrat or Independant!

One last quote from Michael Reagan to round out the day: "A purely fact-finding trip that involves looking around, visiting American military bases or talking with U.S. diplomats is not a problem. Nor is formal negotiation with foreign representatives if authorized by the president. (FDR appointed Sens. Tom Connally and Arthur Vandenberg to the U.S. delegation that negotiated the U.N. Charter.) Ms. Pelosi's trip was not authorized, and Syria is one of the world's leading sponsors of international terrorism. It has almost certainly been involved in numerous attacks that have claimed the lives of American military personnel from Beirut to Baghdad."

http://reagan.com/news.cfm?id=39

Answer 2

They should get to that right after the impeachment of Bush and the deportation of Cheney.
Why are the Republicans so upset that Pelosi showed some guts and did what Bush should have been doing for 6 years? For the entire middle east to be stable, like it or not, Syria will have to be a major player. Long term it is in the interests of the US and Israel to establish diplomatic contacts with Syria. Pelosi should be applauded.

Answer 3

If Nancy Pelosi went to Syria as a citizen the Logan Act would be appropriate language and criticism for her actions. As I understand the news reports, she and others went over as Legislative Leaders, in her case Speaker of the House of Representatives. In this role, she has the constitutional authority of the United States to visit and talk to whomever she chooses. In order for a foreign policy to be executed their are numerous channels that must be accessed, namely the respective embassies of multiple countries. A discussion is hardly foreign policy, and most know that foreign policy is a process. If she can merely go to Syria and declare a foreign policy and it be executed among warring states, simply because she said so, then her political power exceeds the Secretary of State, Ambassadors, the Vice President and a sitting President. Finally, a Republican contingent made the trip prior to hers. The Logan Act was not raised because they went overseas on the basis of their constitutional role. Like the President, Vice President and Secretary of State even the National Security Adviser, their official duties afford them greater privilege and leeway than a citizen. For the Logan act to have teeth Nancy Pelosi would have had to fly a private jet plane or travel by commercial airline and as a private citizen, try to leverage her point of view over and above stated policy. For the sake of discussion, let's say a billionaire took matters into his or her own hands, for business purposes they then try to usurp stated policy that ultimately undermine our foreign policy interests. To add insult to injury, they have exchanged currency or favor through there own personal assets and resources, then The United States of America has an issue that can be rightly addressed by the Logan Act. For this to be the case, Mrs. Pelosi would be uniquely qualified by her actions as a private citizen to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. given the aforementioned scenario is unlikely in this case, what we have is a bi-partisan legislative group who do not stand indirect or direct violation the Logan Act as previously stated. Given the Intelligence debacle on Iraq, it stands to reason that 10-25 federally elected officials from both parties are trying to find out first hand clear differences. As I understand the Constitution mind you I am by no means a constitutional lawyer, these federally elected officials are the Authority of the United States, along with the Executive and Judicial branches of our government. What do you think?

Answer 4

Speaker Pelosi did not violate the Logan Act. Constitutional lawyers have said so. Sorry to rain on your parade.

Would the Logan Act violations apply to Congressman Issa, a Republican too? He also talked to President Assad.

Answer 5

Since the Logan Act was written, no one has ever been convicted for breaking the act. I'm sure that President Bush would like to charge her with treason; he won't because he knows he will never get a conviction, so why bother. It would just cause him more trouble than it would be worth.

Answer 6

You need to stop watching the FOX NOISE CHANNEL and look at reality.

Nancy did nothing more than other politicians have done and, at least 30 congressmen and senators have visited Syria in the past 12 months.

Learn the REAL news before you start spouting that FOX NOISE CHANNEL nonsence because you don't know what you are talking about,.

Answer 7

Let me get this straight, the Pentagon just released a report proving there was no tie with Al Qaeda and Sadaam, which means Bush and Cheney are liars. And your worried about Pelosi???? Tell me. are the republicans that went with her gonna get charged to? You republicans and your manufactured outrage is hilarious.

Answer 8

She's the Speaker of the House - she is authorized. See constitution.

Answer 9

specific yet in basic terms while we deliver to the justice Mr Bush for: violation of human rights violation of international rules violation of our shape violation of capability violation of financial disaster" see nationwide debt" I shall proceed?

Answer 10

Yes, right after the impeachment for lying about WMD's and aL-Qiada links.

Question is, which one caused more deaths?

The question is insane, "THE STATE DEPARTMENT WENT WITH HER!"