Pelosi Explains Why She Won't Impeach

[davidswanson]

From The Nation:

Katrina vanden Heuvel: "On balancing politics and staying true to values... If the book's subtitle is A Message to America's Daughters, what is your message to those daughters who will ask what our representatives did to hold this President and Administration accountable for grave abuses of power? By not allowing impeachment 'on the table,' aren't you failing to protect democracy and the rule of law for future generations of our children and grandchildren?"

Good question.

Nancy Pelosi: "Let me say it to you this way, because most people are very emotionally involved in this issue and this President, as I said, is a total failure."

Now upholding the rule of law is dismissed as emotional? And a man who set out to seize unprecedented power, enrich his cronies, expand the military, enlarge the empire, and shut down what was left of a social net AND SUCCEEDED is a "total failure"?

"He's not a leader. He has no judgment, he has no knowledge, he has no plan. I've been saying that for a year."

Well, who the hell hasn't been saying that - and better - for longer? Did we elect you to say stuff? He had a plan and has seen it through. Can you say the same?

"Here's the thing. This is how I see it as Nancy Pelosi, not in my role as Speaker... why I ran for leadership and the rest. I was not setting out to win for two years. I did not want there to be any doubt in anybody's mind that this is going to be a long standing, get used to it, strong Democratic majority."

So the point of winning in 06 was to win in 08 and the point of winning in 08 was, etc...., but how does that answer the question you were asked above about shirking your duty to govern in between elections?

"So, in my head '06 was first, and then in '08 we strengthen and increase, In 2010, there's a little ebbing--assuming we have a Democratic President--and that's not traditionally been a big year. So we hold our own. So, 2006, we win. 2008 we grow and strengthen, and in 2010 we sustain and in 2012 with a new map: it's a whole new world. This map, we can only go so far with this map...redistricting...we need a whole new map. What we're talking about is only the next presidential election."

So now you tell us that not only can you not govern during an election year, or during an election pair of years, or during an election period of 4 years, but you can't govern during a redistricting decade. The purpose of our people as a nation is now reduced to redistricting? Gerrymandering is the ultimate end of our existence? This is the depth of sleeze and emptiness we have sunk to? And you're on a book tour to promote this as a model for girls and young women?

"So my view in politics is deeply rooted in how I was raised in politics: It's all about economics. One of the reasons I decided to run for leadership is I thought it was absolutely urgent that we win. We see a situation where we have an economy where they are sucking the money out of the middle class. One percent of the people in this country control almost a quarter of the wealth...and it's at the expense of the middle class. We want to reward success and achievement, entrepreneurial spirit and the rest of that. But this is not what a democracy is about. So my whole thing was always about the middle class being this backbone of a democracy and I saw what was happening here was with the President and the Republican Congress a complete disregard--worse than that--for working families in our country."

So you won't impeach because of the damage that Bush and Cheney are doing to the country? And by not impeaching you'll allow the war to continue that is sucking the lifeblood out of the economy and the actual blood out of thousands of people? And you'll beat and threaten and bribe your colleagues to fund that war well into the next Congress because you're a forward-thinking long-term visionary?

"So I come into this picture with, they have to know we're here to stay, plus we have to have a predictable future. And I said before the election that impeachment was off the table. Now that means, in the set of facts that we know now the fact of the matter is that in order to impeach the President, you must have the information."

Here's a list of crimes (PDF) drawn up by Conyers 2.5 years ago. And here's a list of crimes (PDF) from Kucinich's articles of impeachment drawn up by Elizabeth de la Vega.

Could a few thousand people fax these to Speaker Pelosi please? Fax: [phone], Phone: [phone], Email: [e-mail] or [e-mail]

Bush has repeatedly instructed current and former staffers to refuse to comply with subpoenas and contempt citations.

Bush has violated numerous laws and claimed the right to do so in signing statements, as documented by the Government Accountability Office.

To watch a video of Bush admitting to violating FISA (thereby committing numerous felonies) go to the White House website here, and watch the December 19, 2005, press conference. You'll notice that Bush claims he began these crimes after September 11, 2001, which is not true; he began them earlier. You'll notice that Bush claims to have legal justification for violating the law, but those claims have completely collapsed. He also claims the spying is limited in ways that it is not. And when asked why he didn't try to change the law rather than violating it, he said he just doesn't have to because he's the president.

Does Pelosi subscribe to the belief that torture was ever legal?

Here's someone who does not: http://cindyforcongress.org

"Also, the fact of the matter is you don't get any information from these people."

The House Judiciary Committee passed articles of impeachment against Nixon over that problem. It is, of course, because you have promised never to impeach no matter what, that the White House laughs at your requests for information, and the rest of us cry over your treason.

"The further fact of this is that because of the judges that they appointed, we couldn't get any information about Cheney."

You mean like this kind of information?

"So what is the risk-benefit of going down that route rather than saying we want to bring the country together so that we could win and continue to win and elect a Democratic President--absolutely essential--and change the economics of America?"

Glad you should ask. The risk of bestoying absolute power on future presidents and vice presidents is complete global catastrophe and the death of hundreds of millions of human beings. The risk of impeaching is that Fox News might call you names or you might lose an election. However, when Democrats led the way against Nixon they won and when they acted as you are during Reagan's presidency they then lost. Imagine for a minute a Senate trial in which Senator McCain has to defend the crimes of Bush and Cheney. Can you imagine that AND imagine McCain comign anywhere close to winning an election?

"This is going to be a caste system and I carry that burden as well as some more and the rest of it. I carry that responsibility."

Indeed.

"So my view of it is what is in the interest of unifying the country which--we have a responsibility to do, but to do so in a way that has a progressive economic agenda. And other people just see it as if we want it, we do this then we're going to win--well, I'm not sure. I have my own--what's the word I usually use about this--grievances about Democrats who voted for this war. We had a word that there was no intelligence to support an imminent threat to the United States. There was nothing. But when I was running to be Speaker they said, if you go against this war you will never go any place in this party. You're probably one of thirty-five people going against this war. I told them, I may be the only one but I won't be voting for this war. I had to oppose many Democrats, including the whip. That was a big deal. And also the Senate voted the wrong way--voted to give him the authority to go to war and use that power when there was absolutely nothing in the intelligence to support the imminent threat that the Administration was claiming...You've heard me say this before...when I said that at the time, they said you're calling the President a liar...I said I'm stating a fact. As it turns out, everybody knew that he didn't have...and now everyone's blaming it on the faulty intelligence. It wasn't there. So in terms of why should he be impeached? Because he took us to war? Well what about these other people who voted for that war with no evidence to tell them that this war? Are they going to be voting with us to impeach the President? Where are these Democrats going to be? Are they going to be voting for us to impeach a President who took us to war on information that they had also?"

It's good that you are openly admitting that you will not impeach for the gravest offense in US history because members of your party are complicit in it (inluding your own leading of the charge to fund it, lest we forget). But how can you not impeach over the president repeatedly instructing current and former staffers to refuse to comply with subpoenas and contempt citations? How can you not impeach for the president openly announcing through "signing statements" his intention to violate numerous laws and proceeding to violate them? How can you imagine any member of Congress to be complicit in THOSE worse-than-watergate crimes (as if congressional complicity were any sort of excuse anyway)?

"No, no--we have to hold the President accountable and we have had more hearings on accountability. We've set a record. But Mr. Waxman has and others, I think, have established a record in the past eighteen months to build whatever we're going to do next time. There is a record of what they have done in terms of squandering our money. The whole thing."

Oh, a record! Wow. Thanks. And Congressman Conyers is writing another book. That'll be sure to deter future tyrants.

Katrina vanden Heuvel: "How do you foresee that record being used?"

Personally, I wouldn't line a bird cage with it.

Nancy Pelosi: "I think that once we have a new President we can get more information because I think the country deserves the right to know. But we'll never get the goods on Bush to impeach him until we get the votes from the people who voted for the war, overwhelmingly, and what does that do to the country in light of the fact that the Republicans would have liked nothing better. You know who wanted us to impeach the President...it was the Republicans."

Not according to the polls. It was, has been, is, and will continue to be more Democrats than Republicans, and a majority of Americans. And polls showed that a majority believed electing a Democratic majority in 2006 would mean impeachment. And we elected a strong majority. We might have elected a stronger one had you joined the Republicans in telling the public that a Democratic majority would bring justice and peace. You fell for a bluff, now know you were had, and still brag about it. That's a sign of sickness.

"All of that takes the attention away from what is the issue. They are sucking the money out of the middle class to the advantage of the wealthiest people in our country and they would like nobody to be paying attention to that."

This from the woman who just led the effort to dump hundreds of billions of borrowed dollars into killing people in Iraq and enriching Bush-Cheney cronies.

"You want to go impeach the President, you want to do that...because it's all about money for them...the money their friends made on this war...the money their friends made getting us to four dollars a gallon at the pump...the transfer of wealth. So put me down as a very liberal progressive economic Democrat. We're here. I'll take the barbs, but I've got to keep us on course so that we can be a strong, assured, assumed-to-them, Democratic majority--so we can do what we have to do: healthcare, education, fairness and prosperity and let people participate in the prosperity of our country. It's only a decision and every decision has been made against working families in America and the leverage has been with the wealthy. I mean, these people at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, they've joined the Wal-Mart club. That is to say, these people make in two weeks even more what it takes a minimum wage earner working full-time for his entire life. Something is very wrong."

You're not a progressive, not a liberal, not a democrat, and not upholding your oath of office. Please don't come back from your book tour. Add more cities. Add more nations. Just please keep touring.

[begin_within]

1. So, in other words,

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. I like how everything else is out of focus in the background

Effective.

[Gold Metal Flake]

4. Go along to get along.

Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Go along to get along.
Nancy Pelosi: Serving herself by serving Bush.

[Demeter]

49. Nancy Pelosi Stars As an Incompetent Secretary

The old-fashioned "runs the office with iron fist in velvet glove" kind. She'd be thrown back into the typing pool in a week for being so lame.

[rateyes]

7. Excellent graphic. Should earn a DUzy. nt

[begin_within]

46. Thanks. The sad thing is: I first posted that in February, and nothing has changed.

[Gregorian]

15. Oh, impeachment appears to have fallen off of OUR table.

Haha. I love it.

And then I start to die inside.

[Evoman]

25. That graphic is brilliant. I mean..that's what you vote Democrats in for.

You vote democrats so that democrats can focus on re-electing democrats. It makes sense...the first 2 years you can't do anything because you "don't want to play your hand to early". And the last two you can't do anything because you "have to focus on re-election."

The emperor has no clothes.

[begin_within]

48. Thanks

[dmr]

36. So in other words, she's another Rove - Party above country

I want a Dem majority as much or more than she does, but with the purpose of restoring the Constitution and assuring that there will not be future Bush*-like administration to abuse existing powers and not to create more abusive powers.

That will never happen if abusers are not held accountable. Sticking your head in the sand because you're afraid of Republican backlash is not in the oath Pelosi swore to uphold. Part of the danger in politics is doing what is right and just, not to assure your campaign coffers are full and to assure a re-election in future election cycles.

The only difference between Rove and Pelosi is he unjustly goes after the opposition, whereby she unjustly coddles her opposition. The goal for the two is the same - party power over accountability. Neither route is honorable. Neither route is what this country and Constitution is about!

It's already been proven that if you ignore the law-breakers and Constitution abusers, the next crop that comes into power, will be worse than the last. If we make it through this round, I guarantee you we won't make it through the next. God help the next generation as they damn this current Congress which in time will show placated for their own personal political tenure.

I personally believe we can hold them accountable and also grow into a honorable majority entrusted to be advocates for all Americans.

I don't want Pelosi as our Speaker next Congressional cycle.

[guruoo]

40. So, what do you propose as an alternative to getting Democrats elected? n/t

[MNBrewer]

71. If the purpose of getting Democrats elected is to get MORE Democrats elected

Why bother electing Democrats? They don't DO anything worth doing. Certainly nothing that's difficult to get done, because that would mean they would have to grow a spine and maybe risk the disapproval of Fox news.

[pokercat999]

64. There is no way to insure that dim witted cowards like

Nancy Pelosi remain in power except TERM LIMITS.

One term and OUT FOREVER, never to hold federal office again, serve in the civil service or as a lobbyist. One term and go get an honest job, like drug dealer.

On another note Jon Stewart's (The Daily Show) recent interview with Pelosi was one of his worst, he could have phoned it in.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

127. Term limits could have the effect of "get it while you can."

Knowing that you'll never be held accountable to the electorate, term limits could have the opposite of the desired effect. While I understand and sympathize with the goals of term limits, there is already a limiter in place: the citizenry.

Imo, the proper tack to take is public financing, IRV, moving beyond the two party system and media de-consolidation.

[pokercat999]

143. You can't be serious. 96% of incumbents are re-elected if

they run. With approval rates under 20% how is this possible except the PROCESS is rigged. Criminal prosecution, public disgrace, lifetime concern about revenge execution should hold one timers in check.

I agree with multiple parties and public funding of all elections. I also believe in public funding of defense lawyers in ALL criminal cases regardless of the ability of the accused to pay.

I also believe in public transportation, but that's another thread.

:evilgrin:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

144. Note: "...proper tack..."

Imo, the proper tack to take is public financing, IRV, moving beyond the two party system and media de-consolidation.

- Previous post

And 0% would be re-elected under term limits. "I'm here in Congress for ten minutes(2/6 years)...What should I do? Get mine? Or service the constituents?" :rofl:

[pokercat999]

149. Yes, get yours and if we can prove criminality in the "getting"

you would spent the rest of your life in prison to enjoy it. With no power after your term the proving would be much easier as co-operation with prosecutors would not be so dangerous.


My guess is we are going to agree about your point (public financing) and disagree about mine (term limits) but that's kind of what I expect on this "toe the Dem line" site. The dems never wanted term limits when the re-thugs were calling for them. Then when the thugs got the majority they conveniently forgot about it. I suspect after the 2008 and 2012 elections we will start to hear about term limits again from that most progressive of parties (not) the re-thugs.

[HillbillyBob]

120. House of Reprehensible to House of Representatives for Responsibility

I might as well make my wish...
Dennis Kucinich for Speaker...I would have voted for him or John Edwards for president in the primary if either had been on our ballots.
As we all know the Corpse owned Media ignored them and the reprehensible party decried him.
I saw mz Pelosi on The View and my head almost exploded.
I was hoping Joy would go for the kill.
I realize that being a morning entertainment shew, that Joy and Whoopi have to " Be Nice".
Hell let us get them to run for office!
We may think of them as comediennes, Joy and Whoopi may be funny, but their intelligence and perspective are acute, they see the foolishness and comment on it in an entertaining way.
Ever notice that most comedy has more than a spark of truth, otherwise it would not be funny.
The gop derides "Hollywood" but in my snooping around on IMDB etc, (not entertainment tonight or the enquirer)
I find that a lot of "Hollywood" personalities have a better line on human nature and foibles, else they would not be so entertaining, also many have a much better education than many of our elected officials.
You would be surprised at how many are educated as lawyers &etc , and have one or more degrees in things other than art and drama.
At least they are not all appeasers to the bushed party and letting rove, miers, gonzo run around loose instead of calling them on the carpet to get to the bottom of the Grand ogliarcy Party.

[shireen]

56. wow! that is a GREAT graphic!!!! nt.

[roguevalley]

77. look at her and know the face of evil. she is a quizling coward. what

does she want? Congress polls at 9% now. I loathe her with the heat of a thousand suns.

[LVjinx]

102. Can we impeach *HER*?

For gross negligence?

[Captain Angry]

2. It's almost as if she ran for office so she could be around powerful people.

Because she sure didn't do it for the right reasons.

[file83]

95. Power is very seductive.

Some people, once they get a taste of it, will compromise EVERYTHING just to keep it.

Case in point, Nanci Pelosi.

[WatchWhatISay]

5. Pitiful and disgusting

Lets think concretely.

Who would be a good choice to replace her. My choice is Barbara Boxer.

[rateyes]

8. Boxer is a Senator. She can't replace the Speaker of the House.

[Phillycat]

18. It disturbs me that people who post on this website don't know the slightest

thing about how our government is structured or actually functions. And you've gotta figure that the people here know MORE than probably 75% of average Americans. :crazy:

[WatchWhatISay]

122. It disbturbs me that some people who post on this website are so abrasive

My mistake, yes I know Boxer is a senator, but I guess I just was tired or something when I made that mistake. The poster before you pointed out my mistake, which was the right thing to do. If I truly didn't know she was a Senator, I would have learned something.

But you felt the need to make me feel as if I don't know enough to post here. Why would you do that?

[snappyturtle]

6. IMHO ol' Nancy could have everything she is talking about, i.e. power,

with impeachment....maybe even bigger and stronger types of power. She is not on the same plane as I am. I believe she diminished her position in the Democratic party and the Democratic party itself when she nixed impeachment.

[EFerrari]

9. Juan played the View clip on DemocracyNow! this morning.

I was surprised that the audience clapped for impeachment. And Nancy looked uncomfortable for half a second.

[wildbilln864]

10. **k&r! nt

[AndyTiedye]

11. She Couldn't Very Well Say "Because I'm Being Blackmailed", Could She?

[gratuitous]

34. If she is being blackmailed

The surest way to end that threat is to expose it oneself. If Pelosi is being blackmailed, she could simply reveal whatever shameful or secret information someone is holding over her head, as well as the identity of the person doing the threatening. I think public opinion would back her. If public opinion lands on her rather than on her blackmailer, she could resign either her position or her seat, and let someone who isn't in thrall to some low-life scumbag try his or her hand at running the country.

She does place the good of the country over her own political career, doesn't she?

[Greyhound]

55. The problem with that is that, if true, it is not likely to be something embarrassing

or politically bothersome, but rather something that will land her and her thieving husband in jail for a long time.

[tomp]

123. yes, and the one option she does not have is to betray the country...

...based on the excuse that someone is holding something over her head. the founding fathers who risked life and limb to create this country roll in their graves at the very idea that a patriot would put personal gain over freedom. if you're not willing to die for the constitution you should not be in office nor should you call yourself a patriot.

the "blackmail" excuse is pure bullshit.

[Kaleko]

57. In the OP Pelosi admits to shielding other Democrats

from exposure as traitors if impeachment proceedings were allowed. This does not indicate blackmail (though that might be another factor in Pelosi's case). No, this is openly admitted "covering-your-criminally-complicit-parties'-ass", in other words, subversion of the law if it implicates you and your cronies.

Amazing, yes? Pelosi states that Democrats who voted for the authorization of the Iraq war KNEW that Bush was lying the country into war.

Here's the excerpt again from the OP:

Pelosi: "So my view of it is what is in the interest of unifying the country which--we have a responsibility to do, but to do so in a way that has a progressive economic agenda. And other people just see it as if we want it, we do this then we're going to win--well, I'm not sure. I have my own--what's the word I usually use about this--grievances about Democrats who voted for this war. We had a word that there was no intelligence to support an imminent threat to the United States. There was nothing. But when I was running to be Speaker they said, if you go against this war you will never go any place in this party. You're probably one of thirty-five people going against this war. I told them, I may be the only one but I won't be voting for this war. I had to oppose many Democrats, including the whip. That was a big deal. And also the Senate voted the wrong way--voted to give him the authority to go to war and use that power when there was absolutely nothing in the intelligence to support the imminent threat that the Administration was claiming...You've heard me say this before...when I said that at the time, they said you're calling the President a liar...I said I'm stating a fact. As it turns out, everybody knew that he didn't have...and now everyone's blaming it on the faulty intelligence. It wasn't there. So in terms of why should he be impeached? Because he took us to war? Well what about these other people who voted for that war with no evidence to tell them that this war? Are they going to be voting with us to impeach the President? Where are these Democrats going to be? Are they going to be voting for us to impeach a President who took us to war on information that they had also?"



David Swanson: It's good that you are openly admitting that you will not impeach for the gravest offense in US history because members of your party are complicit in it (including your own leading of the charge to fund it, lest we forget).

It might take some time until Mme Speaker's confession sinks in...

[mother earth]

12. Pelosi must understand that to call W a failure, and continue to

ignore the cry for impeachment, places her at his level if she continues to ignore WE, THE PEOPLE.

Accountability is of monumental importance, morally speaking and legally speaking, impeachment is an absolute must. It is why the gains were made in 2006, it is the only reason any of us continue to believe in this gov't. For her to deny us is unforgiveable.

[cascadiance]

13. "Meet the new boss! Same as the old boss!"

WON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN!!!

Democrats, please throw this mess of a Speaker out on her rear that seems to be only interested in replacing overreaching power with more overreaching power and doing NOTHING for what they were elected for doing! We need a new Speaker folks!

[balantz]

14. As long as Americans are too lazy to see through her brand of blather

we're screwed!

[EFerrari]

17. Her approval ratings are in the toilet. There's nothing wrong with American

public opinion.

In her own way, Pelosi is as careless of public opinion as the criminal cabal she's enabling.

[balantz]

20. You're right, I suppose not too many people buy her crap anymore.

The fascists have taken over.

[wellst0nev0ter]

78. So She Triangulated Herself Into A Position Where Nobody Likes Her

Brilliant.

Other than a third party wedge movement, primaries are the only way to get rid of these pukes who couldn't get elected unless they had a "D" by their name.

[natrat]

63. exactly, her district just voted her in by a huge majority-stupid fuckers

[pink-o]

68. Cut us some slack! We all thought in 2006 that she would have some nads! n/t

[Cleita]

138. That wasn't in 2006. It was recently in the primary. n/t

[davidinalameda]

105. I wonder if the guy you have as your avatar supported Speaker Pelosi

[Diane R]

16. History will not be kind to Nancy Pelosi. She will be seen as enabling and protecting GWB.

[bertman]

19. WELL DONE, DAVID.

My faxes will be on the way shortly.

Isn't it interesting how Nancy sees Bush as a failure but perceives herself to be a success. Total juxtaposition of reality. As you say so well, Bush has accomplished everything he set out to do AND MORE. Thanks to Quislings like Pelosi and Reid and company.

If the Founders of our Nation had been the cowards that the current Democratic leaders are, THERE WOULD BE NO UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

P.S. Katrina vanden Huevel is one hell of a patriot. I don't know who I appreciate more, her or Glen Greenwald.

[JHB]

21. vanden Heuvel: "I'm speaking with General George McClellan..."

..."General, you have the Robert E. Lee's rebel army right where you want them. Why don't you attack?"

Genl McClellan: "Well, Katrina, my goal is to take Richmond, and the reb army is off in the wrong direction..."


Katrina vanden Heuvel: "But if you smashed the army, wouldn't you be able to essentialy walk into Richmond?"

Genl McClellan: "But it would still be a critical distraction. It's just not that simple..."



What makes her think impeachment would detract from economic reform? Impeachment of Bus & Cheney, with the (non-toothless) public investigations that would entail, would open the floodgates on all sorts of wrongdoing, and the Republicans have been in such lockstep for the past decade or two that exposing B&C would take a lot of Republicans with them -- and send the rest scrambling to distance themselves.

[orleans]

22. thank you david. k&r. it truly is maddening, isn't it. n/t

[hughee99]

23. Un-fucking-believable!

So glad she's looking at impeachment as strictly a political issue (political risk/political reward) as opposed to any sort of responsibility she and her colleagues have been trusted with. :sarcasm:

It's good to know that our elected officials have one priority above all others, KEEP GETTING ELECTED, STAY IN POWER. During the campaign they SAY they want a majority so they can do X, Y, and Z, but even when then get the power, they never implement what was promised, and even more frustratingly, rarely even make a serious proposal to do it.

And while she's holding hearings on accountability, which she's only doing for political benefit anyway, the rest of us are creating a record of her complete lack of accountability in upholding HER oath of office.

[Kolesar]

24. If the butts-in-chairs contingent had written as many letters to Congress as posts on DU

... then there might have been more than two members of Congress advocating for impeachment.

BTW, I funded Kucinich's Congressional campaign

[tavalon]

58. Why is there always someone here who assumes that those of us who post here

aren't able to multitask. I write letters, call and post here. And volunteer locally and have been to my fair share of protests and when I get home, still post here. I'm not alone in that either. Are you only able to do one or the other? Do you really think that the reason they aren't impeaching is because they haven't heard from us in sufficient numbers? BTW, if you think that, you are wrong.

[Kolesar]

85. It is obvious that there is no groundswell of grassroots support for impeachment

No letter writing campaign, no lobbying of Congress.

Most of these "Pelosi haters" are just trolls, anyway.

[Breeze54]

100. Over one million people signed Ramsey Clark's impeachment petition

Over one million people signed Ramsey Clark's impeachment petition
http://www.impeachbushcheney.net/node/206

and....

1,012,606 the number of people who have already voted in the referendum to Impeach Bush!
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer

I'm sure over a million signed DK's petition too! The old one and the new one!

And over 500,000 have signed the petition to impeach Cheney.

Why you think people at DU aren't sending letters and signing petitions and calling is beyond me.

[EFerrari]

116. Excuse me?

[tavalon]

118. Did you lose your sarcasm smiley, because if not,

well, all of what you just said was bull.

[Alcibiades]

98. Funny you should say that

Here's my latest on this subject, prompted by the OP.

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

Your reasons for taking impeachment off of the table are not good enough.

The fact that you did not vote to give George Bush the authority to go to war in Iraq does not give you the moral authority to ignore the Constitution. You shouldn't give the president the authority to start illegal and unjustified wars, so the fact that you didn't do it does not earn you so much as a cookie.

By taking impeachment off of the table, you have emboldened Bush: at a time when he should be chastened, he and his administration are widening the scope of their criminal enterprise. They are laughing at congressional subpoenas. Can you imagine any president ignoring congressional subpoenas during Sam Rayburn's tenure? As the first woman to hold the title of Speaker, I would have imagined that you would have some concept of the historical significance of your position, and might have found it important to be a role model for American girls, showing them how to become strong women. Sadly, you've taught them only to keep their mouths shut and to tolerate the most disgusting and shameful abuse imaginable of the principle of the rule of law.

I know you're not ever going to do anything about any of this, because you've said as much. The Republicans know that, too, and so will continue to destroy the records of their wrongdoing, ignore subpoenas, and laugh at you. Have some courage, or, if that fails you, at least have some shame about your complicity in this. If you won't protect the Constitution--your highest responsibility--then at least have the decency to retire before you do too much damage, and let someone who actually cares about the Constitution assume the speakership.

Please prove me wrong.

[checks-n-balances]

117. Wow - EXCELLENT letter!

"By taking impeachment off of the table, you have emboldened Bush: at a time when he should be chastened, he and his administration are widening the scope of their criminal enterprise. They are laughing at congressional subpoenas...

"...I would have imagined that you would have some concept of the historical significance of your position, and might have found it important to be a role model for American girls, showing them how to become strong women. Sadly, you've taught them only to keep their mouths shut and to tolerate the most disgusting and shameful abuse imaginable of the principle of the rule of law.,..

"I know you're not ever going to do anything about any of this, because you've said as much. The Republicans know that, too, and so will continue to destroy the records of their wrongdoing, ignore subpoenas, and laugh at you..."

You make some excellent points. I wish she would take them to heart and miraculously decide that the future of her country is important enough for her to do her sworn duty.

[Kolesar]

121. That is ONE letter

Telling Pelosi to quit is certainly not going to influence her. I don't want to get into those details, though.

The vast majority of the butts-in-chairs contingent are not writing letters to Congress. That majority just manages to contribute two-sentence meaningless responses in the thousands of anti-Pelosi posts on DU. They are not letter writers and certainly are not grassroots activists. They are just people starting a fight on a forum and that is my definition of a troll.

[Alcibiades]

128. True enough

People who feel politically empowered in this country are in a minority. Still, if a person is interested enough to post on DU, they should be interested enough to contribute in ways that make a greater difference, such as writing letters to Congress (especially to their own senators and representatives), donating money to the party and its candidates, and volunteering at the grassroots level.

Probably not all of us can do all of these things on any given day, but we can all do some of them this year (and I do think, for what it's worth, that the average level of political activism by folks on DU is about 100 times greater than that of the average citizen). We should all do the best we can to set a positive example for each other, and to report back what we are doing, so that DU is not just an echo chamber, but a place where we inspire ourselves not just to carp and complain, but to listen to our better selves and embody the change we want to see in the nation.

[NoSheep]

134. Looks like the pot calling the kettle black. "I don't want to get into those details, though."

You don't want to write a long response so you write a 2-liner while you're complaining that others do it. I'd have quessed your logic was flawed.

[NoSheep]

132. I write letters all the time and I assure you: Those of us who would

like to kick Pelosi to the curb are not trolls. We just apply our standards of integrity to EVERYONE, not just those in the other party.
:eyes:

[bdamomma]

26. so are we being dismissed as "emotional" or " whiners"

referring to her comment here:

Nancy Pelosi: "Let me say it to you this way, because most people are very emotionally involved in this issue and this President, as I said, is a total failure."


as someone else said about us. This is extremely condescending to us, to view us as emotional and have no regard to the information what we have read and has been presented to us.

[JHB]

28. Hint to Nance...

...people wouldn't be nearly so emotional about it if you'd just take action.

Frustration tends to make a lot of people very demonstrative.

[KoKo]

27. Nancy has been revealed to be a version of Katie Couric....a bubblehead

who is not "Speaker of the House" but a charming bubblehead who is there to cover up the "real powers that be."

Her performance on "The View" and this latest interview with the Nation, leave no doubt in my mind that she is not the real "Speaker." Just put there to replace someone those great Dems who once had principle but are either dead, out to pasture or corrupted. Like Dan Rather who is gone, Katie bubbles on about nothing ...working for her CBS/Viacom masters. Nancy prattles and preens and talks about "building the Dem Party" and how much she cares about the raped middle class while enabling the Repugs and Bush/Cheney to take the last crumbs from our mouths and drains the little money we might have left.

Her "Democratic Party" will be presiding over nothing but a wasteland. Bush/Cheney and the rest have left us bankrupt, owned by corporate and Wall St. criminals, in two wars with a third probably on the way. They've corrupted the Consitution/Bill of Rights and our Judicial System. Ruined our Medical Care while allowing the Pharma Companies to rip us off when they aren't experimenting on us.

She's clueless...a bubble head...another Couric.

[fla nocount]

29. And HeeeeRRe's Nancy.

http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/2008071520080714itzikpelosi.html

Follow the links, they're interesting on their own.

Ol' Fancy Nancy looks like she would like to crawl out of the photo doesn't she? It's almost like she knew it would end up on DU.

[dixiegrrrrl]

30. Very impresive, David. thank you for this.

[Time for change]

31. It's hard to fathom that she could feel good about "compiling a record" when she doesn't

have a clue as to what she will use that record for.

[jeff30997]

32. Fuck you Nancy!

You won't impeach for personal interests ? And it's supposed to be an excuse ?

If you were being blackmailed into doing this I would understand a little bit but

apparently it's not the case.

You're either just an incompetent power-starving idiot or you were bribed big time!

Argh! :grr:

[bobd0]

52. Make that FUCK YOU NANCY X 2!

[jeff30997]

69. Hehehe.I guess...

That would make a threesome.Welcome to DU bobd0. :toast:

[RainDog]

104. Allow me to add my "Fuck you, Nancy" to the stew.

She's complicit by her behavior. The int'l criminal court should arrest her. She could then make a bargain for clemency in return for testimony. This seems to be the only thing that would make her realize that it's not okay to collaborate with torture in order to win an election.

[AntiFascist]

33. A simple question for Nancy Pelosi...

what use is it having a long-term Democratic majority when they fail to hold the corrupt Republicans accountable, while many Dems also participate in the war profiteering (Dianne Feinstein comes to mind)? What she is really saying is that she wants there to be only one ideology guiding Congress, regardless of what party is in power, and that it maintains the road to imperialism.

[happydreams]

35. Pelosi said....

that Bush is a nice guy. She said this a year or so ago. While then calling Hugo Chavez a thug. Pelosi is out to lunch.

[Phredicles]

60. Hey, that is just not true! She never said Bush is a nice guy;

She said Bush is "a lovely man".

[happydreams]

152. Oh, she said that too?

[NRaleighLiberal]

37. Time to send an email....

just sent -

Dear Ms. Pelosi,

You do realize what a complete and utter disappointment you have been to those of us in the US who expected the current administration to be held accountable for their crimes? You are also an embarrassment to me, my family and my friends. You say that impeachment is off the table, that you can't identify any crimes that this president has committed? You must be kidding. or...

In fact, we wonder what sort of blackmail information that the GOP must have on you and on Harry Reid to have performed in such a completely impotent way since your election. My anger, my depression, my disappointment - and that of my family and friends - is so deep that we really don't know what to do next. Of course, we are doing what we can to help Obama get elected in terms of volunteering, talking to friends, praying.

But please do realize that you have wasted two years allowing the Bush Cheney crime family to continue their destruction of the constitution and ruining of American reputation around the world, never mind carry out the murder of thousands and thousands of innocent Iraquis - and so many needless deaths of our servicemen. In my book, you are not a Democrat, you are not progressive, not liberal, not helping anything. You are behaving like a GOP mole, a Republican operative to enable the continuation of the crimes. How can you sleep at night?

Shame on you -

A very concerned, depressed citizen and Patriot,

XXXX (of course I signed my name and address..)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

38. She has become a truly pathetic caricature of what's wrong with American politics.

Ethics? Principles? Common decency?

Pshaw! It's all about money and winning.

[Joanne98]

39. Unbelievable.

[mdmc]

41. thanks for the OP

[Phred42]

42. SO she's willling to trade the Constitution and HER CONSTITUTIONALLY MANDATED and SWORN Duties

For Political agenda.

Sound Familiar?

[Phred42]

43. There is no time left - If Democrats refuse to do their duty - there is no HOpe

Audacious or otherwise

Democrats are in on it. They are, and have been, the Silent Partners of the Reich.

[balantz]

59. Fascism has slipped into place.

Woe to our American Democracy!

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[balantz]

72. Looks about right to me. n/t

[Phred42]

131. I've seen this before and - you are correct

[Oak2004]

76. No. There's hope.

A coordinated effort to depose the worst of them in the primaries (or in a few instances even in the general), a handful at a time, will eventually clean up the Democrats. When our illustrious leaders see a few of their fellows packing up and going back home every primary, they'll have their come-to-progressive-jeebus moments.

The Republicans have been so awful it's been easy to forget that there are a lot of problems with the Democratic Party. Well, we're close to dispensing with the Republicans, and it's clear that the Democrats still have their problems. Phase 1: Vanquish the Republicans leads naturally to Phase 2: Vanquish the (problem) Democrats.

[Individualist]

44. Translation: Nancy is toeing the DLC line.

[timtom]

45. Obfuscation. Pure and simple.

In other words bullshit!

And she doesn't dance with words very well, either.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[bobd0]

50. Pelosi is nothing more than a Bush enabling fucking fraud

Pelosi calls Bush a failure even as she continues to refuse to hold him ACCOUNTABLE not only for his failures but for HIS CRIMES!

I sincerely hope true Democrats remember Pelosi for the failure she is and HOLD HER ACCOUNTABLE for her complicity.

Next up, Pelosi will refuse to allow a full vote on Rove's contempt charge.

What a fucking disgrace.

[madrchsod]

51. she makes fat denny look good

[bobd0]

53. Sad but true. But even worse, she's making Bush and Cheney look good too.

[tavalon]

62. No she doesn't

but neither does she look better than him.

[debbierlus]

54. She is SUCH a complete disgrace. Shameful.

I never liked her.

And, man, was I right.

[disndat]

140. Pelosi and HRC,

are the opposite of role models for young women to follow.

[spanone]

61. how odd that people would be emotional about their democracy.....botox poisoning

she's a sad case of success going to her head. lost her rudder. forgot her mission......

[90-percent]

66. It's as easy as cake to them now. Decades of practice.

They are so damn accustomed to screwing middle class and poor to benefit the rich and powerful, they think Impeachment is merely another item camouflaged on a checklist.

How can they not realize that we the people all know how grave and imperative it is to hold these criminals to account for their treasonous ability to violate their oaths to uphold the constitution? Nancy, can you not see the Presidential oaf next to you eating a baby alive? WE ALL CAN!!!!

I hope all of Congress will some day soon have to face the 2008 equivalent of the Nuremberg Trails. And I hope the people that run those trials are every bit the leaders and statesman and humans right advocates as the crew from post WW2.

-90% Jimmy

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[totodeinhere]

73. No matter what the reason, using the "B" word is unacceptable.

Two wrongs don't make a right. Pelosi is wrong not to support impeachment, but you are wrong to use a sexist word.

[kaygore]

151. Thank you for the heads up.

Next time I'll call her a bastard.

[Alcibiades]

99. Um, did you miss the primaries?

Using the word bitch to refer to a woman is never good.

I used the word "c***" here not too long ago, in a perfectly innocent way, and it got alerted on and deleted. So calling a woman a bitch is also not OK, I think.

[kaygore]

150. Thanks for the heads up

Guess I'll call her bastard, then.

[klyon]

70. She should take a few minute to read the oath of office she took.

Also Bush's oath. It is clear that the Constitution comes first not the party. Our democracy is lost if this the way our leadership thinks. She should do the right thing even if it means her return to private life, which I don't think would happen.

[chill_wind]

74. Excellent OP. Makes all the strong points on Nancy Pelosi's betrayal

to her office and to our democracy....which at last is only languishing on the barest and sparest and most tenuus of life supports. K & R.

[Pisces]

75. I have never liked Pelosi. She is weak and needs to be replaced.

[Jefferson23]

79. Who the fuck does she think she is kidding?

There are conservatives who recognize these bastards crimes! She should have kept her mouth shut if this was all she was going to add, no crimes? Unbelievable!

[OffWithTheirHeads]

80. It's time to take Nancy

OFF THE TABLE!

[BlueJac]

81. The Fool on the Hill

[Amonester]

82. She Really thinks we're all idiots... like... n/t

[DCKit]

83. Where have all the Pelosi defenders gone? n/t

[fla nocount]

90. We're invisible, we've been put on ignore, suits me. n/t

[fla nocount]

91. Self delete. Dupe

[slor]

84. You just gotta love...

Katrina.

[sorval]

86. we should start with pelosi

Impeach her for failing to act on clear crimes. Then when she is gone impeach Bush and Cheney.

[Stuart G]

87. I just heard this quote on the radio..

She says that Bush did not commit a crime. or words to that effect..If he committed a crime, it would be another story.

What planet is she on?

[mmonk]

88. Nixon was president at the wrong time in history.

[trickyguy]

89. Yes, "the emperor has no clothes" but Nancy is afraid

to point her finger at him and tell the truth.

Her answers to these questions were the greatest case of double-speak that I have heard

in a long time. Who the hell does she think she is anyway? :evilfrown:

[Marr]

92. So she's just admitting that she's a party hack, not a representative.

Oh, that's wonderful. Very inspiring.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

93. She epitomizes what we despise most about them - Party Before Country

She could not have been clearer.

[Beregond2]

94. There is not a sinlge word in her response that addresses the question. It is all doubletalk.

[tomp]

124. yes, essentially gobbledy gook. nt

[file83]

96. Can we impeach Nanci Pelosi?

I mean, she's violating the oath she gave to protect the U.S. Constitution.

It's our obligation to demonstrate to Mrs. Pelosi that impeachment is most definitely NOT off the table, including for her.

[Breeze54]

97. You've out done yourself, David.

Bravo and absolutely stunning!

And that graphic in post # 1 illustrates the OP perfectly!

:kick: & Recommended

[Imagevision]

101. Kucinich on Pelosi's Claim of No Crimes Committed By Bush or Cheney

This video will shed some light on what Kucinich has for Pelosi to make her decision to understand the crimes that were already committed by Bush & Cheney goto> http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/35154

[Ellipsis]

103. Same as it ever was.

And you may ask yourself
What is that beautiful house?
And you may ask yourself
Where does that highway go?
And you may ask yourself
Am I right? ...am I wrong?
And you may tell yourself
My god!...what have I done?


Once in a Lifetime-talking heads
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYbUCvz1LYE&feature=related


Thanks David.

K&R

[Kaleko]

106. We need to spread the word that Pelosi has made a partial confession

in this interview. This is the first time I've heard Pelosi make some actual sense when explaining why impeachment is off the table. Why? Well, because it would implicate all the Dems who voted for the Iraq war as aiding and abetting in high treason.


Once again, in Pelosi's own words from the OP (my bold and comments in brackets):


"I have my own--what's the word I usually use about this--grievances about Democrats who voted for this war. We had a word that there was no intelligence to support an imminent threat to the United States. There was nothing. But when I was running to be Speaker they said, if you go against this war you will never go any place in this party. You're probably one of thirty-five people going against this war. I told them, I may be the only one but I won't be voting for this war. I had to oppose many Democrats, including the whip. That was a big deal."


(Right, so with that, Pelosi has absolved herself, she's been white-washed in her own mind. And now she goes on to point an accusing finger at her Democratic colleagues):


"And also the Senate voted the wrong way -- voted to give him the authority to go to war and use that power when there was absolutely nothing in the intelligence to support the imminent threat that the Administration was claiming...You've heard me say this before...when I said that at the time, they said you're calling the President a liar...I said I'm stating a fact. As it turns out, everybody knew that he didn't have..."


(What? A shred of evidence of WMDs?


"...And now everyone's blaming it on the faulty intelligence. It wasn't there. So in terms of why should he be impeached? Because he took us to war? Well what about these other people who voted for that war with no evidence to tell them that this war...?"

(...was legitimate?)


"Are they going to be voting with us to impeach the President? Where are these Democrats going to be? Are they going to be voting for us to impeach a President who took us to war on information that they had also?"


See? Pelosi is accusing Dems who voted for the war, such as Hillary Clinton, of being determined to sabotage any impeachment investigations because of their complicity in Bush's policies. This amounts to a criminal conspiracy, folks.

[bertman]

136. Kaleko, thanks for the quotes. Whether Nancy is "misrepresenting" this to cover her ass,

THE FACT IS THERE ARE DOCUMENTS THAT PUT THE LIE TO WHAT SHE SAID.

Vince Bugliosi showed the intelligence reports to the House Judiciary Committee last Friday. The copies that went to Congress had been altered to show that Saddam was trying to stockpile WMD's and reconstitute his nuclear weapons program. BUSH AND CHENEY HAD THE ACTUAL CIA REPORTS DELETED.

So, what do we make of this? I say Nancy is trying belatedly to use the "everyone else was doing it, but I didn't go along" defense.

Bottom line: there's something much bigger and more powerful at work here. It's like several posters have said before, the majority of our Senators and Representatives now REPRESENT THE CORPORATE INTERESTS AND IGNORE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. They get rich, they get great perks, they hobnob with the rich and powerful and then they retire to extremely lucrative lobbying jobs. Why would they worry about the "little people" in the Party. We're only there to send them LOTS OF MONEY to run their faux campaigns to elect Democrats. DLC, DCCC, RNC: all the same, except more closet homosexuals and child molesters in the RNC's party.

[Kaleko]

142. Thank you for unpacking this can of worms a little further, bertman.

This is so important, it needs to be verified and the word spread far and wide:

Bertman: "Vince Bugliosi showed the intelligence reports to the House Judiciary Committee last Friday. The copies that went to Congress had been altered to show that Saddam was trying to stockpile WMD's and reconstitute his nuclear weapons program. BUSH AND CHENEY HAD THE ACTUAL CIA REPORTS DELETED."

See, I didn't know that. Whoa!


B: "I say Nancy is trying belatedly to use the "everyone else was doing it, but I didn't go along" defense."

Agreed. So, is she getting desperate? Is this her attempt to save her own skin as the heat from all sides becomes more unbearable? I hope she won't get away with white-washing herself.

[AllyCat]

107. The usual jellyfish whine:

But we dooonn't haaaavvee the vooooottteesss!!!

Good God Almighty lock her up too.

[Baby Snooks]

108. Boycott San Francisco!!!!!!!

Don't go there, don't buy from companies there, write letters to the travel agencies and the companies and city officials telling them you refuse to endorse Nancy Pelosi and if the people of San Francisco elect her again, you will never allow a dime of your money to go into the San Francisco economy. Put your money where your mouth is.

The worst enemy of the American people is not in the White House. The worst enemy of the American people is in the House of Representatives.

[deacon]

110. San Fran needs a Ned Lamont. n/t

[EFerrari]

115. What an irresponsible suggestion.

This district is as much if not more victimized than you are. We have no representative now that Nancy is Speaker.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

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

[deacon]

109. She's obstructing justice and this vote on rove should be immediately.

She doesn't belong in the job.

[Tab]

111. There's no point (to faxing or calling)

I hate to say that, but there's obviously something else going on here. Either she is just blind and stupid, and I doubt that, or there's something else in the works, but she's been such a holdout that she's risking her democratic political career to protect Bush. I don't know what it is, but she is obviously Not Going There, and I suspect phone calls and faxes aren't going to matter.

[AllHereTruth]

112. Fuck you Pelosi.

Bush is a war criminal.
He has shredded our sacred constitution.
He lied to start this never ending war.

And YOU Pelosi has let him get away with it...because YOU did nothing to stop him in the first place.

Because of YOU Pelosi, This current president will be allowed to ride off into the sunset with his head held high. What kind of an example are YOU setting.

Bush lied. Bush killed. Bush took our civil liberties. YOU LET HIM. History will remember HIM and YOU.

[GreenTea]

113. What did Bush's eavesdropping get on Pelosi to make her toll the line, or is she just corrupt?

Bush's illegal eavesdropping, presumably on democrats started in Feb. 2001 many month's before 9/11...we all have our skeletons, what do the republicans have on Pelosi, or is the multi millionaire Pelosi just as corrupt as Bush and the republicans?

One thing for sure Pelosi is shameless, with absolutely no integrity what so ever, as she goes along smiling and carrying Bush's water, while allowing Bush to get away with crime after crime.

[Dover]

114. It's not like the illegal war is the ONLY reason that Bush/Cheney should be

not only impeached but arrested. There are so many things....the list is long.
But then, if everyone's a corrupt, who will make the arrests?

The fact is, that there ARE no parties and really never have been. The differences
are superficial.
It's all one big happy family. The Dems build up the coffers and the Pubs empty them
and spread them around. If you really look hard you'll see that fascism has quietly
snuck in the back door. The signs are all there. Make your own list.


Pelosi, Kerry, Clinton......all of them were trying to get us to just "move on".
Yes, let us not dwell on corruption and criminality. The play must go on!

[Finite]

119. It's odd

how congress talks about defending the middle classes in the same way that the unions used to talk about defending the working classes back in the day.. shows how far down the line capitalism has gone I suppose, even those higher up are getting screwed these days!

[tomp]

125. is there an electoral alternative to peolsi that can be talked about on du?

any anti-pelosi campaign we can support here that will not get us tombstoned or just deleted?

[Overseas]

135. I was part of only 10% voting against her due to resisting impeachment.

In the last election, 89% of her constituents voted to reelect her.
It is exciting to have our Congressperson as the Speaker I guess.

[tomp]

137. thank you but that didn't answer the question. nt.

[Hubert Flottz]

126. One Word...

cow·ard·ice, noun,

lack of courage to face danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.

EDIT...

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=cowardice

[MasonJar]

130. Send it to her once a day for the rest of the year.

[lumberjack_jeff]

133. This is brilliant work, David. Thank you. n/t

[Cleita]

139. None of her excuses ring true.

Now they are saying she won't impeach because it would take media attention from Obama to cover it while he is trying to get elected. I doubt it. I'm sure the media would ignore the impeachment hearings because it would be making Bush look bad.

[Usrename]

141. Porter Goss?

:banghead:

[countryjake]

145. Thanks for putting this together! Bookmarked! n/t

[Waiting For Everyman]

146. Petition to Replace Pelosi...

http://www.petitiononline.com/everyman/petition.html


Article...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Pelosi-Says-They-Have--Cle-by-scott-creighton-080729-630.html

[riverdeep]

147. Two especially salient points come through.

One, she's not going to impeach because it would embarrass the many Democrats who sided with the administration.

Two, she's not going to impeach because she believes it will lead to further victories down the road.

Wrong on both counts. Whatever the Dems did needs to be aired as well. They will be held accountable if they engaged in criminal acts and held accountable in the least by losing the primaries in their election run. Congress, as Republicans like to point out, has lower approval ratings than the Moron-in-chief. That isn't because they've done too much, it's because they haven't done enough, namely impeachment. Of course you're going to get resistance, and you may not win, but to not even attempt it is itself criminal. You don't have the choice of taking it off the table. It's your job.

[FormerOstrich]

148. The.....

Honorable Nancy Pelosi,

I feel certain my letter will not be heard. Yet, I am compelled to write.

I had held such high hopes when we elected you. I was so proud of the new Speaker of the House.

My pride soon turned to bewilderment and then to anger as I realized my belief in the United States of America…my great Country was more a reminiscing memory than any bit of reality in this century.

I wonder what my ancestors would think to see what they ultimately fought for. The most corrupt President and Vice President than we have ever known (I am convinced of that to the very core of my being) with a complicit Congress, which in spite of a public yearning for justice, has refused to defend the Constitution of the Untied States.

You can explain and try to justify but your actions are indefensible. You have not held those accountable even though they have brought harm to the Constitution, Our Country, and our very way of life. They have redistributed the nation’s wealth into their and theirs pockets at all of ours expense. Yet you have refused to take any action.

You are busy playing politics but you are not a statesman. You are busy preening and fussing over your career but you have lost site of what your career was intended to be.

You have not defended the Constitution of the United States. You have not represented you constituents or fellow country men/women. There is no defense for having not and for not now taking the steps necessary to begin restoring our wonderful Country as your job demands of you. You have failed your duty. Either ignorantly or criminally matters not. Your willfulness is too apparent.

Please resign

[FormerOstrich]

153. A

:kick:

because I hate when I kill such an excellent thread with such great analysis!

[clear eye]

154. I'm Warming Up My Fax

Your links are superb (not to mention your entire anaylsis), and I'll join the crowd faxing them to Pelosi.

BTW, Rep. Wexler, D-FL, one of only seven members to sign onto the Kucinich impeachment bill (HR 1258) is in trouble in his district because, without maintaining the usual token apt. in his district, 11 years ago he moved his family to Maryland so he could be with them more. A turncoat "independent Democrat" who dropped out of their primary because he would have lost is running a spoiler campaign against him. I encourage people to reward Wexler's courage by helping his campaign how ever they can.