pelosi,at what point is her actions and words considered treason?

Question

She is not helping our country!

Answer 1

having open, intelligent discourse with other nations is not treason. Also three other Republicans visited Syria. The U.S. House members, who included Virginia Republican Frank Wolf, Pennsylvania Republican Joe Pitts and Alabama Republican Robert Aderholt were in Syria three days before Pelosi.
If you really want to talk treason, what about Bush declassifying, and Cheney releasing to Scooter Libby the Identity of un undercover covert CIA operative who's job it was to find WMD and Loose Nukes because her husband disagreed with the war. Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, testified to a federal grand jury that he had been "authorized" by Cheney and other White House "superiors" in the summer of 2003 to disclose classified information to journalists to defend the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence in making the case to go to war with Iraq, according to attorneys familiar with the matter, and to court records. And this was during a time of War. So tell me who's treasonous?

Answer 2

Congress has its own powers, separate from the President - See Article I of the Constitution. Pelosi was within those powers; she was on a fact-finding mission. Members of Congress, Republican and Democratic, go on these missions all the time and they talk to foreign leaders. Four Republican Congressman also went to Syria, last week, and two talked to the Syrian President.

Not talking to our enemies has NOT helped, and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group recommended such talks as a way out of the quagmire in Iraq.

Bush told Pelosi not to go, but is the Executive the only power and the supreme power in our government? Did the Framers of the Constitution want a monarchy? If you're n ot sure, read Article I of the Constitution one more time.

And why no outrage against the Republican Congressmen, especially Darrel Issa of California, an Arab American who conversed in Arabic with Assad the day after Pelosi's visit.

Answer 3

What she advocates may not be treason, but as you state, she is certainly NOT helping our country. She possibly may have violated the Logan Act.

Perhaps Ms. Pelosi just does not have a good understanding of the Muslim world and the quest for power and world domination. I am especially convinced of that because she favors establishment of the "nuclear fuel bank" although a country like Iran has the capability of further enriching "nuclear fuel" to be pure enough (U235) to provide fissile material for a nuclear bomb.

On April 10, 2997, an article written by Carla Mariunucci appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, indicating that Ms. Pelosi and Rep. Lantos are interested in making a "diplomatic trip" to Iran.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/10/BAGV9P6C0S6.DTL
Pelosi, Lantos may be interested in diplomatic trip to Iran
Furthermore, the article quoted Rep Lantos as saying that he co-sponsored legislation with Ms. Pelosi which could pass as early as May that calls for making available to all countries --including Iran -- nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes under international oversight by establishing a "nuclear fuel bank".

I believe that the legislation is:
HR 6 Clean Energy Act of 2007
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h6ih.txt.pdf

Those who advocate the "nuclear fuel bank" consider that clean nuclear technology would be available to all countries. However, those who argue against the "nuclear fuel bank" point out that the uranium enrichment process (using centrifuges to separate isotopes as in the FEP at Natanz, Iran) can also be used to produce a more pure grade of uranium 235 which may be used in a nuclear bomb.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4416482.stm
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/09/28/opinion/edbuffett.php
http://www.goodharborreport.com/node/295

The head of the Iranian Nuclear Energy Organization, Gholam-Reza Aghazadeh, explains it thus:
The simple way is to inject 0.7% (uranium) and obtain 3.5%, right? Now, if you take this 3.5% and inject it again into the chain (of centrifuges), the result will be 20%. If you inject the 20% back into the chain, the result will be 60%. If you inject this 60%, the result will be 90%.
http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=1120
http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S6&P1=2,148&P3=4

Since Iran has uranium enrichment capabilities at its FEP (fuel enrichment plant) at Natanz, giving Iran nuclear "fuel" enriched to 3.5% might not be a good idea if Iran does have the agenda to develop a nuclear bomb.

The BBC article (listed below) describes the nuclear fuel process.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/sci_nat/05/nuclear_fuel/html/mining.stm

Answer 4

Her actions are not considered treasonous. It seems to me that our current President has no respect for the Constitution and his war is an on going felony. Its more patriotic to oppose Bush and shut down this quagmire in Iraq.

Answer 5

She can talk with officials about any topic and do fact finding. She cannot negociate treaties or agreements, that is done by the President, she can only vote on them.

America never ratified the treaty for the League of Nations because leaders of Congress weren't allowed to go and talk and fact find. It was shoved down their throats by the President, so they refused to ratify it.

So there is precedent for Congress to go out and talk and do fact finding.

Answer 6

At what point will Pres Bush,VP cheney ,Gonzalez, et al 's actions be recognized as treason? Selling out our country for personal gain and individual un checked power?
How much danger will they continue to place the citizens in- eshewing all diplomacy?

Answer 7

None..and whether she is helping or not is pure opinion.
Treason is to raise arms against the US or give aid and comfort to our enemies...she has done neither....this segregation between conservatives and liberal is just getting sickening...I wish we listened to George Washington and never created political parties...they do more harm than good.

Answer 8

You can't be serious. You honestly think there's any chance of resolving the situations in Iraq and Iran without talking to Syria? Grow up!

Answer 9

I thought Bush was bad giving speeches then you have to watch Pelosi. She would start and then jump to something else. God Help Us

Answer 10

You should do a search. This question was asked 200 times last week.