Nancy Pelosi Responds to Dennis Kucinich

[notfullofit]

Impeachment proceeding will go NOWHERE.

Just reported on CNN this morning.

[jgraz]

1. Yet she has no problem with funding Chimpy's illegal war.

What a disgrace this woman is.

[MonkeyFunk]

2. she has opposed the war

and tried to find ways to end it. She supported reasonable timelines - which Kucinich opposed.

It's silly to blame her for this war.

[bdamomma]

7. sorry talk is cheap Nancy and so is she.

[bryant69]

10. Hmmmm. Nancy Pelosi is "cheap"? Let's explore that for a moment

In what way is she cheap?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[bdamomma]

21. how much evidence or articles of impeachment do have to come

forward, or will they just be eating their words when something else happens.

[bryant69]

42. That's not really an answer to my question.

What else do you think might happen? Iran?

A distinct possibility, I admit- kind of scary as well.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[bdamomma]

47. yea, a possible pre emptive strike on Iran....

I hate to think of the possibility.

[mac2]

22. She has that drugged up look to me. Her eyes are so glassy.

[fla nocount]

29. Kool Aid n/t

[bdamomma]

40. she always looks like that.

she is so involved she is just protecting herself.

[virtualobserver]

11. I agree, the only solution is to take the Presidency.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

69. I thought the only solution was to take Congress

That was going to solve everything, yes, indeed.

:tap foot:

[Two Americas]

71. not quite

We still need to control the Rotary Club, and Toastmasters and the Welcome Wagon..but THEN, once we have THOSE, look out right wingers!! We might need the Yacht Club, too, I guess, because I keep hearing people say that "we don't have the boats."

[pollo poco]

24. silly indeed

When we all know the real culprit is...

that OTHER woman in government.

Those upstanding congressmen who voted differently than you or I would have?

They were duped by Bush. It wasn't their fault.

Let's campaign for them. Open your wallets!

[mac2]

30. The war was started by Bush Inc.

To impeach him would mean ending it. Can't she see that fact? Or is she a globalist after all? A sheep in wolves clothing.

[bdamomma]

41. she is just protecting her own a$$, she is up to her eyeballs.

and there is a little animosity between her and Harman too.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fla nocount]

54. Deleted-who and why?

Just asking........too graphic or too opposed to some undercurrent here that I just can't seem to grasp after 7+ years. I've had posts deleted before without being banned so it's obviously dogma and not sentiments that I trod upon. PM me.

[erisian]

49. Pelosi Opposes the war?

If she had allowed impeachment proceedings to begin immediately after she got the Speaker's chair, the Iraq war would be over already. She has almost single-handedly ensured its continuation, both by blocking impeachment, and by voting for boatload after boatload of funding. The war is illegal under both US and international law, and it is unconstitutional. Bush is a war criminal and a terrorist for starting it. The Congress is a guilty of "providing material support to terrorists" for aiding and abetting its continuation, a violation of TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 113B § 2339A . I'm not making this up, I'm just reading the laws.

Who is defined as an international terrorist under current US law?

Let's go directly to the applicable statute:

<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002331----000-.html>

§ 2331. Definitions
Release date: 2005-08-03
As used in this chapter--
(1) the term "international terrorism" means activities that--
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended--
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;...

Let's see, how does the Bush regime score under 18USC §2331?
(A) guilty
(B)
(i) guilty
(ii) guilty
(iii) guilty
(C) guilty

They're batting 1000! Of course, all other US administrations in recent history have committed the same types of crimes, but now we have some new laws like this one to throw specifically at terrorists. Thanks for the Patriot Act, Dubya! Don't you think it's about time it got put to good use prosecuting some actual terrorists instead of Canadian tourists? Now all we need is an Attorney General and a Congress who will obey their oaths to uphold the law...

Here is the War Crimes statute:

<http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002441----000-.html>

TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 118 § 2441
§ 2441. War crimes
Release date: 2005-08-03
(a) Offense.-- Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
(b) Circumstances.-- The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
(c) Definition.-- As used in this section the term "war crime" means any conduct--
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.

The "Providing material support to terrorists" law is here:
<http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002339---A000-.html>

Lysander Spooner said; "Governments are gangs of criminals." We've got a really good example of that in Washington right now.

[Blarch]

68. But...

she has betrayed you and I ...she has betrayed the nation and her office.

She is protecting war criminals, lets repeat that...

SHE IS PROTECTING WAR CRIMINALS

[OneDemsConscience]

77. Nonsense

Not another nickel for that immoral disaster. Nowadays, the Dems are using the war to push their programs through, by attaching them to war funding. They are just as guilty as the GOP.

[Captain Hilts]

6. We don't have the numbers and no Dems showed up to hear what DK said. nt

[jgraz]

12. There should at least be a vote. Let the Congress take a stand.

[Captain Hilts]

19. I'm all for a vote. nt

[notfullofit]

35. Remember what

Alcee Hastings said when Dennis wanted to impeach Cheney last year?

Kucinich “is on a quest of his own. He sees flying saucers and he acts like one,” Hastings said.

[mac2]

23. He did it at night after the session was over.

Nancy Kapture was there. I didn't finish his speech since I had to go to bed. It was late here in the MW.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

13. Well, credit where credit is due...she kept her promise to not give him "blank checks"...

...he just fills in the amount and she signs it. But

NO BLANK CHECKS!

:eyes:

[mdmc]

44. triangulate - try not to hate

:mad:

[Fovea]

3. New Headline--

Head of DINO wing asks fat lady in fake viking helmet to relinquish the podium.

The gentle lady from California's time has nearly expired.

[Diane R]

4. Okay. Nancy Pelosi is not a bad woman. I'm thinking there is something going on we don't know about.

Honestly?

I wonder if Pelosi and other top Democratic leaders have reason to really worry what gwb would do if cornered. If he's really more mentally ill than we might now, and capable of doing real harm in retaliation.

I honestly do believe he has deep psychosis that we will only hear about after he leaves office. The man (horrifyingly) does have access to the 'red button'.

I wonder if Pelosi, et. al., know things about his condition that are making them take this very non-threatening path? I believe we will learn a lot once he's out of office, and her actions might make more sense in retrospect.

All I know is that Pelosi and Conyers used to be leading the 'anti-bush chorus', and then suddenly they have each taken a turn to thwart impeachment efforts. I trust John Conyers, and I truly think he has a good reason for not supporting Kucinichs' impeachment efforts.

History written from this era is going to be riveting.

[undeterred]

8. They got closer to power and lost some spine.

Its no secret.

[Wizard777]

16. She's a political Brat just like Bush. The Delasandro's are moving up in the ruling class world.

[mac2]

28. They are the "economic royals" who believe they deserve to

rule and the rest of us follow.

[mac2]

18. She or her family maybe in danger but so are ours.

Everyday he is power we are not safe. If the kitchen is too hot get out Nancy.

[EFerrari]

27. She's betting everything on the election. n/t

[mac2]

33. By that time we will be bankrupt and at war with Iran or

whoever wants the oil.

[bdamomma]

46. oh yes, she believes that the election will turn things around.

ole mindset thinking to think an election will take care of things. Someone on some panel I was watching one time brought this up, that this kind of thinking should be changed, they wait for an election thinking that things would change.

[Runcible Spoon]

55. nice to see you admit she is chickenshit to take a stance and is openly passing the buck

doesn't make her lack of conviction and spineless pandering any less disgusting or unforgivable.

[Individualist]

37. She's a DLC tool

[frogcycle]

50. I like your attitude

I actually have no way of knowing, as is the case with some 99% of the public, including all those posting here, what is going on behind the curtain. Various people for whom we had respect have done seemingly strange things over the past eight years, and the howling mobs are always quick to say 'spineless' and 'turncoat' and 'dino' etc. Kerry didn't contest Ohio, so is is a weasel. Gore packed it in after the SCOTUS decision so he's a weasel. Reid and Pelosi are weasels. and on and on.

I am not offering excuses - since as stated above, I have no real knowledge of what the truth is.

But as I have posted some gazillion times, there most assuredly IS a "vast right wing conspiracy" and it has a LOT of clout. Stories of J Edgar Hoover blackmailing congresspeople probably pale in comparison to what is done, what is threatened behind the scenes. Are some of these people 'wimping out" and "going along to get along?" Probably. Biding their time rather than throwing themselves into the breach. Kind of like the people on a hijacked plane frozen in their seats, waiting for someone else to make a move.

Do leaders like Pelosi and Reid have knowledge they dare not share publicly? I can hardly imagine that they would not. Are they exercising perfect judgement based on that knowledge? Maybe some day history will judge that.

I applaud Dennis Kucinich for doing this despite the resistance, because it "pushes the envelope." Without knowing what makes Pelosi tick, the most you can do, other than vote her out of office, which can't be done before bush's successor is selected anyway, is put something like this out there and let her pick her way through it. If the issue is she is spineless, maybe she "goes along to get along" - with Dennis! If the issue is she truly knows best and is a patriot willing to look bad for the greater good of the country, then she'll act accordingly. Dennis is at least testing the waters; creating options.

[warren pease]

53. How about her complicity in Bushie's war crimes? Would that maybe sorta explain...

... her incredible dereliction of duty and all those disgusting excuses?

Like there's no time -- well there was back in January 2007, you conniving skank. See this post for a look at the important stuff they accomplished yesterday.

Like it distracts from the dem's agenda -- as if there is one worth mentioning.

Like it would divide the American people -- who are such a cohesive bunch to start with.

Like the people don't want it -- except we're her employers so how about just doing the fucking job we well her to do.

Problem is, she's up to her botoxed forehead in Bushie's torture lust.

Four house dems -- including Pelosi -- were briefed by the CIA on waterboarding in 2002, were concerned that the "interrogation techniques" were "tough enough" and in the process became accomplices to BushCo's war crimes.

Remember this December 2007 Washington Post story about these dems getting a "virtual tour" back in 2002 of some of the CIA's offshore black sites, at which time CIA briefers revealed the use of waterboarding as a standard interrogation method? Let me refresh your memory...

Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002 In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say

By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 9, 2007

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

"The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

Personally, I'm not satisfied that they've told everything they know until all their fingernails are pulled out with pliers, their teeth are drilled without anesthetic and they've taken a couple of .38s to the kneecaps. But that's just me.


wp

[bean fidhleir]

58. You're not the first one to grasp at straws that way. But that's what they are: straws.

There's nothing behind their refusal to do right but the same thing that was behind the Nazis: psychopathic greed. They don't give a flying about anyone but themselves, and that's the sum and substance of the reason right there.

Don't make stuff up. It's tempting, but it only increases your own mystification and makes you crazy.

[wtmusic]

5. Is this a new statement?

All I see at CNN.com is:

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly said she would not support a resolution calling for Bush's impeachment, saying such a move was unlikely to succeed and would be divisive."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/11/kucinich.impeach/index.html

:shrug:

[bdamomma]

15. these people will regret for never considering this power that

is given to them IMPEACHMENT.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mac2]

14. Well Nancy I can tell you that you will be going somewhere

for keeping justice from being served.

[nadinbrzezinski]

17. Why are we not surprised?

Oh the horrors, trying to uphold the Constitution is a no-no in this New Amerika

[mac2]

20. Nothing Nancy Pelosi does surprises me since the 2004

She stopped the vote count (the first vote count and recounts because of fraud) and declared Bush President. No one acted like they saw she and Tubbs Jones do it on CSPAN.

[Freddie Stubbs]

66. Maybe because before the 2006 election Pelosi promised that impeachment would be "off the table"

She has kept her word on this.

[Echo In Light]

25. Sadly, not surprising in the least. "America has 1 political party w/2 right wings" G.Vidal

[bdamomma]

26. kick

[LSparkle]

31. She's a disgrace ... any chance we can oust her as Speaker?

Maybe President Obama will come out in favor of someone
else next term ... someone with (pardon this sexist remark)
A PAIR!

[mac2]

34. The Democrats in Congress pick the majority leader themselves.

We might replace them all with petitions since elections aren't working.

[Freddie Stubbs]

51. Obama isn't in favor of impeachment either:

Obama: Impeachment is not acceptable

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out list of political shortcomings he sees in the Bush administration but said he opposes impeachment for either President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.

Obama said he would not back such a move, although he has been distressed by the "loose ethical standards, the secrecy and incompetence" of a "variety of characters" in the administration.

"There's a way to bring an end to those practices, you know: vote the bums out," the presidential candidate said, without naming Bush or Cheney. "That's how our system is designed."

The term for Bush and Cheney ends on Jan. 20, 2009. Bush cannot constitutionally run for a third term, and Cheney has said he will not run to succeed Bush.

more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

[kevinmc]

32. Modern Impeachment Procedure:

* Impeachment resolutions made by members of the House of Representatives are turned over to the House Judiciary Committee which decides whether the resolution and its allegations of wrongdoing by the President merits a referral to the full House for a vote on launching a formal impeachment inquiry.

* The entire House of Representatives votes for or against a formal impeachment inquiry, needing only a simple majority (a single vote) for approval.


* If approved, the House Judiciary Committee conducts an investigation to determine (similar to a grand jury) if there is enough evidence to warrant articles of impeachment (indictments) against the President. The Committee then drafts articles of impeachment pertaining to specific charges supported by the evidence. The Committee votes on each article of impeachment, deciding whether to refer each article to the full House for a vote.

* If the House Judiciary Committee refers one or more articles of impeachment, the entire House of Representatives votes on whether the article(s) merit a trial in the Senate, needing only a simple majority for approval.

* If the full House approves at least one article of impeachment, the President is technically impeached and the matter is referred to the U.S. Senate. The House then appoints members of Congress to act as managers (prosecutors).

* The trial of the President is held in the Senate with the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court presiding. The President can be represented by anyone he chooses. He may appear personally or leave his defense in the hands of his lawyers.

* The entire Senate may conduct the trial or it or it may be delegated to a special committee which would report all the evidence to the full Senate.

* The actual trial is conducted in a courtroom-like proceeding including examination and cross-examination of witnesses. During questioning, Senators remain silent, directing all questions in writing to the Chief Justice.

* After hearing all of the evidence and closing arguments, the Senate deliberates behind closed doors then votes in open session on whether to convict or acquit the President. The vote to convict must be by a two thirds majority, or 67 Senators. If this occurs, the President is removed from office and is succeeded by the Vice President. The Senate's verdict is final and there is no right of appeal.

I don't see the votes for a Conviction and Bush will be out of Office in 6 months .... this should have been done 3 years ago ... to late now.

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/impeachments/

[mac2]

36. It is not too late to hold him accountable and demand he

be removed from public office forever. He can then be tried by the people for treason and murder in a court of law. I don't want to support him one more day let alone a life time.

"Change of face law" is no longer acceptable since it makes us a lawless society. Politicians walk away with their pillage while the rest of our society goes behind prison walls...or the death penalty.

[bdamomma]

38. anyone listening to Randi.

she said Nancy is just thinking about Nancy because she is quite aware of the bush undertakings.

[Metta]

39. She and all the rest of those supporting * are traitors and are unfit to serve.

After all they've done and refuse to do. Happy karma, gang.

[Individualist]

45. History will judge her harshly. Her descendants will hang their heads in shame

because she is enabling the most criminal administration this nation has ever had.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/03/29/bush_pelosi_wideweb__470x300,0.jpg

[bdamomma]

48. Dennis is on the line with Randi!!!

http://www.novamradio.com/live/

[Disturbed]

52. Pelosi wouldn't dream of Impeaching George because

she believes that he is a "lovely" man. :loveya:

[Cleita]

56. My tin foil hat theory is that putting an impeachment and congressional

investigation on the table will uncover a lot of dirty business among corrupt Congressional members both Democratic and Republican including herself.

:tinfoilhat:

[Greyhound]

70. No doubt at all. It isn't only Republik thieves that are making a killing

on this slaughter. Both the Congressperson and Senator from NoCal are dirty up to their eyeballsand have been for years and years.

[malaise]

57. Harry Reid said the same thing

Try and see his interview with Nora on GEM$NBC

[undeterred]

59. Where and when did she say "Impeachment proceeding will go NOWHERE"?

She doesn't control the judiciary committee and she can't keep them from doing their jobs.

[notfullofit]

62. I believe it was on CNN Headline News

not 100% sure though because I was channel surfing at the time and then pissed off too.

[OzarkDem]

60. Keeping her powder dry

She has warehouses full of dry powder by now....

[Summer93]

61. Nagging question

I keep coming back to the idea that impeachment is written into the Constitution then how can any one person (Pelosi) choose to NOT follow the Constitution the way is already written?

Whatever her reasons and we may never know what they are the question still remains can any of our Representatives or Senators choose at any time to NOT follow the Constitution as written.

[Zhade]

63. She's a coward and an accomplice after the fact.

I do not understand how anyone can think there is ANY excuse for letting criminals walk.

[leftchick]

64. nancy loves her georgie!

blue blood and half blood. They always protect their own and FUCK US OVER!

[Individualist]

67. A picture is indeed worth a thousand words...

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/03/29/bush_pelosi_wideweb__470x300,0.jpg

[OzarkDem]

65. Protest in Denver - Pelosi & the Boyz will be there

Might as well. If we don't make our own party take action, who will?

[PeaceNikki]

75. Yeah, I am sure that'd play out well for us for the GE.

[DailyGrind51]

72. Why do you think

Cindy Sheehan is running against her?

[Occam Bandage]

73. Good job, Nancy. Eye on the ball.

[spanone]

74. no surprise here....maybe she can be part of the change the new president is talking about

[Summer93]

76. Pics can say a lot

When I look at the picture of Nancy and George the first thing that my mind interprets it - she has said something that she feels good about and he listens and is taken aback by what he hears.

Since they were obviously at a dinner party. I think she said to him - I will never attend another dinner party where you are present nor will I ever invite you to my home ever again, you've gone too far.

Remember the face that George made when he tried to leave early and found that the door was locked and he had to be helped to find the correct exit. He had a similar look on his face.

[Fireweed247]

78. They reported on Impeachment on CNN??!!

Has this been on the corporate news elsewhere? (I have no TV antenna so I am out of the loop)