Did Nancy Pelosi commit a felony???

http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908

"Against the wishes of the president..."

When did we become a monarchy???

Excellent article Bim. But as it stated, it is a political hot potatoe. I think, at the least, we can conclude that Pelosi made a bumbling fool of a mistake, especially delivering misinterpreted messages from Israel to the rogue dictator of Syria.

Pelosi [censored] up royally, no questions asked.

Should criminal charges, dating back to John "Alien and Sedition" Adams' time as President, be filed against her? Probablly not.

The real victory for the GOP against Pelosi is seeing her ousted as Speaker in 2009.

Ya mean you didn't know about King Georgie????

First you have to show how the stated goal of the delegation
"The purpose of the visit to the Middle East was to assess the impact of events in the region on the national security interests of the United States. " meets the definition of
"to communicate with a foreign government in an effort to influence that government's behavior on any "disputes or controversies with the United States.""

Then you have to figure out what "without authority of the United States" means.

And finally, once those bits are wrapped up, you have to explain why
David Hobson
Tom Lantos
Henry Waxman
Nick Rahall
Louise Slaughter
Keith Ellison
Frank Wolf,
Joe Pitts and
Robert Aderholt
aren't guilty of the same offense.

Either way, I do not think Speaker Pelosi should be tried for a crime, but what distinguishes her role from those listed, is that she is 2nd in line for the presidency, and as such, carries enormous weight in her dealings. Further, she assumed the role, albeit unofficially, as a Head of State, when clearly that is neither her authority or responsibility. It projects a message to a rogue state already under U.S. Sanctions that we have dual foreign policies.

How did she "assume" the role of Head of State?

Good question, and, how can that be true if Wolf, Pitts and Aderholt went to Syria and met with the president before Pelosi's group went?

Unofficially, mind you. Diplomacy is the terrain of the Secretary of State under the authority of the President.

The GOP Congressman that went may have been acting on behalf of the President. In effect, her "message" may have conflicted with whatever they were trying to accomplish, again resulting in a view of mixed foreign policy.

Moron Arlen Specter had also gone recently, and he was excoriated too, and should have been, yet he is GOP.

Perhaps it got somewhat confusing when she decided to conduct shuttle dipolomacy rather than conducting a congressional fact finding mission that the other Congress critters said they were doing.

And then, she wasn't helped when House Foreign Affairs Chairman Lantos said this "We have an alternative Democratic Foreign Policy" recently.

Nothing will come of this, but she needs to lay low for a while.

Mind you...the Head of State is THE PRESIDENT...

And...lots of Congressmen and Senators visit other countries, they do not assume the role of Head of State.

Correct, the President is, not the Speaker. The other congressman and senators did not act in the same capacity. I think Pale's ansswer above expresses what I am trying to say more clearly.

I concede...