The Nancy Pelosi Rumor Mill Options

[NEM]

Heard on the Thom Hartmann show today...that

Nancy Pelosi has sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee asking them NOT TO issue contempt, or inherent contempt warrants against Karl Rove.

I have not heard verification of this yet, but it came from one on Hartmann's political media guests.

If this is true, then the democratic voting bloc of the nation needs to ask all congressmen to vote to have her removed, impeached, as the Speaker of the House, effective immediately.

[Prairie Mermaid]

Heard on the Thom Hartmann show today...that

Nancy Pelosi has sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee asking them NOT TO issue contempt, or inherent contempt warrants against Karl Rove.

I have not heard verification of this yet, but it came from one on Hartmann's political media guests.

If this is true, then the democratic voting bloc of the nation needs to ask all congressmen to vote to have her removed, impeached, as the Speaker of the House, effective immediately.

I've been giving this some thought, NEM, and even if what you say is true, I still give her benefit of doubt on her motivations. Do we really want a full blown confrontation (and that's what it will be) with the criminal Bush administration to dominate the pre-election news and inject itself into the competition between Obama and McSAME??? I'm just as eager as you, or anybody, else to hold these CROOKS accountable. But, now, more than ever, the timing must be considered. I have very serious reservations about creating a political crisis of this sort AT THIS TIME. You know as well as I do, that the unethical rightwing will use this rare congressional action against Rove/BushCo to attack Dems and Obama any way they can, no matter HOW justified and correct the action may be. IN FACT, COULD THIS BE ROVE'S INTENTION: TO PUSH THE DEM CONGRESS INTO THIS UNPRECEDENTED ACTION??? Think about it. It would be just his style. His "swan song" for his Fuehrer! We need to be patient, I think, just a little longer. String this along (with all the other charges against this criminal regime) until after the November elections. Then, with Obama as POTUS, we'll nail the bastards to the wall...

This post has been edited by Prairie Hussein Mermaid: Jul 8 2008, 01:51 PM

[Prairie Mermaid]

DP...sorry!

This post has been edited by Prairie Hussein Mermaid: Jul 8 2008, 01:46 PM

[queteimporta]

I've been giving this some thought, NEM, and even if what you say is true, I still give her benefit of doubt on her motivations. Do we really want a full blown confrontation (and that's what it will be) with the criminal Bush administration to dominate the pre-election news and inject itself into the competition between Obama and McSAME??? I'm just as eager as you, or anybody, else to hold these CROOKS accountable. But, now, more than ever, the timing must be considered. I have very serious reservations about creating a political crisis of this sort AT THIS TIME. You know as well as I do, that the unethical rightwing will use this rare congressional action against Rove/BushCo to attack Dems and Obama any way they can, no matter HOW justified and correct the action may be. We need to be patient, I think, just a little longer. String this along (with all the other charges against this criminal regime) until after the November elections. Then, with Obama as POTUS, we'll nail the bastards to the wall...

In my opinion you are correct.

[merickson]

The Dems permit illegal contempt to be shown towards the Legistlative branch of the Government.
This contempt was shown towards investigations into the corruption of the Department of Justice by the politcal wing of the White House and exposure of a CIA nuclear disarmament operative (among other investigations.)
The Executive branch's stopping these investigations, by the Legislative branch, is acceptable because pressing those investigations might hinder a Democratic victory in November.

Remind me why I should prefer Democrats (who ignore the dismantelling of our constitutional system) over Republicans (who tried to remove a President for adultery).


VOTE DEMOCRATIC IN NOVEMBER, they'll destroy the Constitution slower!!!

This post has been edited by mBHusseinErickson: Jul 8 2008, 06:19 PM

[NEM]

I've been giving this some thought, NEM, and even if what you say is true, I still give her benefit of doubt on her motivations. Do we really want a full blown confrontation (and that's what it will be) with the criminal Bush administration to dominate the pre-election news and inject itself into the competition between Obama and McSAME??? I'm just as eager as you, or anybody, else to hold these CROOKS accountable. But, now, more than ever, the timing must be considered. I have very serious reservations about creating a political crisis of this sort AT THIS TIME. You know as well as I do, that the unethical rightwing will use this rare congressional action against Rove/BushCo to attack Dems and Obama any way they can, no matter HOW justified and correct the action may be. IN FACT, COULD THIS BE ROVE'S INTENTION: TO PUSH THE DEM CONGRESS INTO THIS UNPRECEDENTED ACTION??? Think about it. It would be just his style. His "swan song" for his Fuehrer! We need to be patient, I think, just a little longer. String this along (with all the other charges against this criminal regime) until after the November elections. Then, with Obama as POTUS, we'll nail the bastards to the wall...

Very valid points.

However, it's time for action, period. The longer the Dems allow this, and other issues to slide, the worse it will be for them in November.

It's time for action, NOW.,

[sj-on-the-box]

I've been giving this some thought, NEM, and even if what you say is true, I still give her benefit of doubt on her motivations. Do we really want a full blown confrontation (and that's what it will be) with the criminal Bush administration to dominate the pre-election news and inject itself into the competition between Obama and McSAME??? I'm just as eager as you, or anybody, else to hold these CROOKS accountable. But, now, more than ever, the timing must be considered. I have very serious reservations about creating a political crisis of this sort AT THIS TIME. You know as well as I do, that the unethical rightwing will use this rare congressional action against Rove/BushCo to attack Dems and Obama any way they can, no matter HOW justified and correct the action may be. IN FACT, COULD THIS BE ROVE'S INTENTION: TO PUSH THE DEM CONGRESS INTO THIS UNPRECEDENTED ACTION??? Think about it. It would be just his style. His "swan song" for his Fuehrer! We need to be patient, I think, just a little longer. String this along (with all the other charges against this criminal regime) until after the November elections. Then, with Obama as POTUS, we'll nail the bastards to the wall...

You have many valid points, but I think we need to put a stop to this right now. Americans are starting to get used to the idea that Congress is not an equal branch of the government.

If we let this one pass whose to say the new Democratic administration will not continue letting bygones be bygones.

By the time January rolls around and the Democrats have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House, again who's to say they won't start acting like grown-ups and direct their efforts to the pressing issues..

Issues which are enumerable and of pressing constructive importance.

Let's paint the republicans right now with the criminal, illegal brush they've been whitewashing the Constitution with for the last 7 years.. and let's make the first portrait of the all deserving profaned.. the grand turd himself.. Karl Rove.

..

[cqsallie]

Very valid points.

However, it's time for action, period. The longer the Dems allow this, and other issues to slide, the worse it will be for them in November.

It's time for action, NOW.,

Thom was talking to former Governor Don Siegleman, who said that he hadn't heard this rumor at all. At any rate, Mukasey refused to serve a contempt warrant on any of that bunch - Rove, Bolton, Harriet what'sherface. If the Justice Dept. refuses to act on a contempt charge, Congress can get around this by citing Rove with Inherent Contempt, making it possible for the Congressional Police to arrest him and lock him up in one of the cells in the basement.
This hasn't occurred since the 1930s (don't know who that was). My thoughts on this are that there would be hell to pay. I can't imagine the DOJ standing for it. Would it devolve into armed battles between the Legislative and Executive branches?
On the other hand, Congress can still file contempt charges against these people in seven months, when the Dems take over the Executive branch and Mukaskey and his ilk have departed the scene. So, whether or not Pelosi actually said this, understanding the complexity of the matter is important in making judgements.
Sallie

[sj-on-the-box]

Thom was talking to former Governor Don Siegleman, who said that he hadn't heard this rumor at all. At any rate, Mukasey refused to serve a contempt warrant on any of that bunch - Rove, Bolton, Harriet what'sherface. If the Justice Dept. refuses to act on a contempt charge, Congress can get around this by citing Rove with Inherent Contempt, making it possible for the Congressional Police to arrest him and lock him up in one of the cells in the basement.
This hasn't occurred since the 1930s (don't know who that was). My thoughts on this are that there would be hell to pay. I can't imagine the DOJ standing for it. Would it devolve into armed battles between the Legislative and Executive branches?
On the other hand, Congress can still file contempt charges against these people in seven months, when the Dems take over the Executive branch and Mukaskey and his ilk have departed the scene. So, whether or not Pelosi actually said this, understanding the complexity of the matter is important in making judgements.
Sallie

Sallie Hussein.. your word is gold, but where does it say past administrations are accountable for deeds accepted by the populace and the Congress as legal at the time of their implementation.. ???

I'm no lawyer.. but I think I could argue that one right out into the street...

It's either wrong, illegal or not.. you don't wait for good weather to make the decision..

..

[Prairie Mermaid]

Sallie Hussein.. your word is gold, but where does it say past administrations are accountable for deeds accepted by the populace and the Congress as legal at the time of their implementation.. ???

I'm no lawyer.. but I think I could argue that one right out into the street...

It's either wrong, illegal or not.. you don't wait for good weather to make the decision..

..

But you also don't take a case to trial without a fair jury. Judges move trials all over the nation finding a place that insures an unbiased jury can be assembled. We may have to move these cases to a time that allows for fair trials and investigations and a more honest and unbiased assembly of congresspersons to run them...

[sj-on-the-box]

But you also don't take a case to trial without a fair jury. Judges move trials all over the nation finding a place that insures an unbiased jury can be assembled. We may have to move these cases to a time that allows for fair trials and investigations and a more honest and unbiased assembly of congresspersons to run them...

by juries, you're referring to judges..

can the next administration replace judges..

they can replace attorneys..

I can't honestly disagree with you .. but I don't think statute of limitations applies in these cases..

..

[brians]

The Dems in Congress need to act, maybe they could get their approval rating back into double digits if they showed a spine for once and flushed old turdblossom down the drain.

[Plunderer]

Thom was talking to former Governor Don Siegleman, who said that he hadn't heard this rumor at all. At any rate, Mukasey refused to serve a contempt warrant on any of that bunch - Rove, Bolton, Harriet what'sherface. If the Justice Dept. refuses to act on a contempt charge, Congress can get around this by citing Rove with Inherent Contempt, making it possible for the Congressional Police to arrest him and lock him up in one of the cells in the basement.
This hasn't occurred since the 1930s (don't know who that was). My thoughts on this are that there would be hell to pay. I can't imagine the DOJ standing for it. Would it devolve into armed battles between the Legislative and Executive branches?
On the other hand, Congress can still file contempt charges against these people in seven months, when the Dems take over the Executive branch and Mukaskey and his ilk have departed the scene. So, whether or not Pelosi actually said this, understanding the complexity of the matter is important in making judgements.
Sallie

Jurney v. MacCracken.

BTW, presidential pardons don't apply in Inherent Contempt...just thought I'd throw that out there too.

Best,

-P

[Plunderer]

Heard on the Thom Hartmann show today...that

Nancy Pelosi has sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee asking them NOT TO issue contempt, or inherent contempt warrants against Karl Rove.

I have not heard verification of this yet, but it came from one on Hartmann's political media guests.

If this is true, then the democratic voting bloc of the nation needs to ask all congressmen to vote to have her removed, impeached, as the Speaker of the House, effective immediately.

Here's where the rumor comes from...Sadly...

-P

[quiscustodiet]

Heard on the Thom Hartmann show today...that

Nancy Pelosi has sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee asking them NOT TO issue contempt, or inherent contempt warrants against Karl Rove.

I have not heard verification of this yet, but it came from one on Hartmann's political media guests.

If this is true, then the democratic voting bloc of the nation needs to ask all congressmen to vote to have her removed, impeached, as the Speaker of the House, effective immediately.

yeah I heard that part of the show

I quickly asked myself well then why and the hell dosen't he get her or her office on the phone and puit it out there on the airways

he doesn't do to many political figures he usually has "think tankers" or "book promoters' on . and the socialist from vermont who has one line;
"Thats a great question" Or "I'm glad you asked that"says bernie (yeah thats all you ever get waste of time)


Yeah before he ever broadcsts stuff like that he needs the primaries on the line after all he is out in oregon and has a lot of influence in california you would think pelosi would want to come on

[NEM]

Here's more.

"I have firm confirmation that Nancy Pelosi is urging the Judiciary committee NOT to go forward with contempt against Rove.

Congressman John Conyers and the Judiciary staff are battling for it but this has become an infight among dems."

Yes, the Speaker of the House, the first women Speaker in US history, and a Democrat is basically saying Karl Rove is above the law.







http://www.atlargely.com/2008/07/much-info-comin.html


=========================================================================

IMPEACH PELOSI BEFORE BUSH AND CHENEY

[Mac McFadden]

I am reminded of the SCOTUS' stance in the counting of ballots in Florida in 2000.
FIRST they issued an injunction to stop the re-counting of ballots.
Later they issued a ruling that ALL the ballots should be re-counted.
BUT (because of the delay caused by their earlier injunction) they also ruled that there wasn't enough time left to do the re-count and still meet the artificial deadline imposed when the fastest means of transportation in the country was the speed of a fast horse.

Pelosi should have initiated a full investigation and possible impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney as the FIRST order of business when she was elected Speaker of the House. Instead she declared impeachment "off the table".
NOW she claims there's not enough time to investigate without it interfering with the election.

Message to Nancy:
There's 'not enough time' because you didn't do the job we elected you to do, you #%#^&@@**@@(!!!!!


Mac

[Prairie Mermaid]

I am reminded of the SCOTUS' stance in the counting of ballots in Florida in 2000.
FIRST they issued an injunction to stop the re-counting of ballots.
Later they issued a ruling that ALL the ballots should be re-counted.
BUT (because of the delay caused by their earlier injunction) they also ruled that there wasn't enough time left to do the re-count and still meet the artificial deadline imposed when the fastest means of transportation in the country was the speed of a fast horse.

Pelosi should have initiated a full investigation and possible impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney as the FIRST order of business when she was elected Speaker of the House. Instead she declared impeachment "off the table".
NOW she claims there's not enough time to investigate without it interfering with the election.

Message to Nancy:
There's 'not enough time' because you didn't do the job we elected you to do, you #%#^&@@**@@(!!!!!
Mac

EXACTLY!!!