All about life, liberty and the pursuit of hopeiness.
| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Nancy Pelosi claims on 60 Minutes that House will not impeach Bush under her Speakership
Greg Tinti has video of Pelosi from her interview on 60 Minutes this evening. Lesley Stahl, surprisingly, asked Pelosi some good questions and at one point during the video Pelosi says that if she becomes House Speaker, Bush will not be impeached.
Here’s the transcript of her interview.
Three words: Don’t Believe Her.
Others blogging about this: Stop The ACLU, Wake Up America
Prior:
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
57 Responses to “Nancy Pelosi claims on 60 Minutes that House will not impeach Bush under her Speakership”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Ask Nancy if any of her businesses employ union workers. And as I recall, this thread is about Nancy Pelosi.
You ask her….what businesses? You mean her husband’s businesses. And I would assume that you are against unions right? Please give examples.
Pat Robertson suggested talking points to Republican leaders to distance the party from the Foley scandal: “The best thing they could do would be to say ‘Well, this man’s gay; he does what gay people do.’”
The House Republicans better be very careful with this one….too many gays in their ranks.
she is a liar. period.
So, Keith, the fact that AFTER it was known that Studds had sex with a 17 year old and all the Dems came out in support of him, means nothing? He was censured, that’s it. If what he did was wrong why was he not forced to resign? Why were there not calls of “child molestor”? Instead, the Dems came to his defense and some of them voted AGAINST censure, including a few who today are blasting Foley.
The cry of cover up is just typical. I would expect nothing less from people like you.
Pot, meet kettle.
Palmer Appears Before Ethics Panel
Monday, Oct. 23; 2:46 pm
Scott Palmer, chief of staff to Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and a critical player in the Congressional page scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), is being interviewed by the House ethics committee this afternoon.
This should be good. He will be sworn in.
Good Lord, I was going to cut and paste most of this stuff, but there is just TOO MUCH!!!!!
You were saying, Keith?
http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/8/11/190221
Clinton legacy
NC, you wrote, “Instead, the Dems came to his defense and some of them voted AGAINST censure, including a few who today are blasting Foley.”
Which ones, please name them? Do you have a copy of the roll call?
The point NC is that no one in the House knew about Studds’ activities until years after the event. And, the Republican leadership (I am sure Mr. Palmer will confirm this today) knew for years. Mr. Palmer, btw, is gay. The velvet mafia strikes again.
So now we have switched to Bill Clinton — what was that someone was saying about avoiding the issues?
Here you go, Keith.
Enjoy.
In case you missed the best part, I’ve got it here:
Many of Studds’ Democratic colleagues including some in the current House and Senate leadership voted against the slap on the wrist of censure. (Conyers, Frank, Lantos, Miller, Obey, Rahall, Waxman, Hoyer and Schumer all voted against it.)
Let me know if there is anything else I can get you, champ.
Gerry Studds
So now we have switched to Bill Clinton — what was that someone was saying about avoiding the issues?
Last time I checked the topic was Pelosi, you’re the one who went off on the Foley tangent. I believe you started with “especially lobbying reforms to stop future Abramoffs and when it comes to protecting the little boys who have been molested lately in the House. ”
So the question is, why did you bring up Foley? I know you have a short memory so I cut and pasted from one of your previous posts, just in case you forgot.
It just seems interesting that you blast all Republicans yet seem to forget the very recent events of the Democrats.
keith, don’t talk to me about anything a republican slime ball has done, we throw ours out, yall celebrate yours and make him head of a committee …
you, sir, are a FOOL.
Oh really? Don Sherwood (the mistress choker) will be removed by the voters. Bob Ney has yet to resign and he plead guilty in court. Curt Weldon is busy lining his daughter’s pockets. Doolittle is making his wife rich. Jerry Lewis in a shady land deal and, even the Speaker has used public funds to enrich himself.
And, once again, the insults. You guys are just too used to talking to one another.
And tomorrow even more Members will testify about what they knew about Foley’s pedophila.
So, you get rid of your slim balls do you. Try harder!
Top aides to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) are expected to testify this week in the House Ethics Committee investigation of the Foley page scandal.
Hastert may also appear, according to Chicago Sun-Times political reporter Lynn Sweet. Today Chief of Staff Scott Palmer entered the room to testify before the committee around 2p.m.
The investigation of how the Republican leadership handled the issue has provoked turmoil and finger-pointing in Hastert’s office, congressional sources say.
Some of Hastert’s principal aides have hired criminal defense lawyers to represent them during the investigation. Ted Van Der Meid, Hastert’s chief in-house counsel, has retained Washington, D.C.-based attorney Lee Blalack, who also represents convicted former Congressman Duke Cunningham.
A key focus of the congressional investigation is the timing of when Hastert and his top staff first learned of Foley’s problem behavior toward congressional pages.
The results of an internal review conducted by the speaker’s office, released on Sept. 30, said Hastert’s staff only learned of complaints about Foley in the fall of 2005 after a congressional page complained about inappropriate e-mails.
But former House Clerk Jeff Trandahl as well as Kirk Fordham, Foley’s former chief of staff, have both told associates, and are believed to have testified before the House Ethics Committee, that top staff in Speaker Hastert’s office were informed several years ago about Foley’s inappropriate behavior toward congressional pages.
What? Are you still here wasting your time Keith? C’mon, don’t you know there are only 15 more window-smashing days (or more importantly nights) till the election? So many Republican campaign offices, so little time. Chop chop!
Don’t forget about tire slashing!!!!!!
- NC….Only Democratic Officials sons are allowed to do that. You have to be a card carrying member of the Marxocratic party for that privilege. You can, however, shoot out Republican campaign office windows though, even if you’re just a SecProg groupie. Have to observe dissident pecking order.
- Bang
Severian, I ask again. How old are you? Only 15 more days and I do have work to do on the campaign. But, it won’t entail breaking windows or making unfortunate comparisons to Kristallnach.
But, tomorrow I will be watching what the house ethics committee will be doing. It should be fun.
You know, Bill Maher said something very funny tonight — Republican have sex the same way they govern — barely legal. And Congressman Gibbons of Nevada has seemed to join the sex bandwagon.
Wow, Bill Maher!! Now I know where you get your great insight and information. From a washed up actor who couldn’t hack it in Hollywood. Good job!
But, tomorrow I will be watching what the house ethics committee will be doing.
I’m sure you will. After the Plame debacle didn’t work out for you I’m sure you are looking for anything you can. So if the Foley “scandal” doesn’t work out, what’s next?
I heard Hastert got a speeding ticket when he was 16!!! I’m sure you will be all over it!
- Yeh, that Plame thing really worked out well. the real culprit confess’s and the nutroots were so burried in their own rhetoric, it took two weeks for them to realize what happened. Now you don’t hear a peep about it anymore. Well they mined it for all it was worth, so they have to move on to this weeks “AnythingGate”. I see the top dawg at the NY Trash has repented on the job they did killing the terrorist money tracing program. Maybe flagging sales is sending them a message from the electorate.
- Bang
Ah geez…the troll is at it again.
He’s unable to speak more than a word or two without changing the subject to Foley, mainly because that’s all he apparently thinks he has. Even then, he gets it wrong by braying about “child molesters” in the GOP, by which he means Emails. But if you read his nonsense on the other thread, the real child molesters – the ones who go far beyond Emails – are fine with him. Like Pelosi, he’s OK with the real pedophiles. You won’t get him to say one word against them. Go check his recent posts.
But what can we expect from someone who gets his news from Bill Maher?? But give him credit – that’s as close as he’s come to actually citing a source for any of his deranged rantings.
I don’t see her pushing for impeachment.
Why should she? Democrats have been out of power for years in Congress, and if they win people will watch to see how they govern. They saw how the impeachment of Bill Clinton cost Republicans seats in Congress in 1998 (including, specifically and not coincidentally, two of the House impeachment managers.) Pelosi is smart enough to know that a Bush impeachment trial is the fastest road they could take back to the minority.
Besides, even if Bush were impeached, then the Senate would have to convict him. Which would require (even assuming the Democrats pick up the six seats they need for control and that every single Democrat voted for conviction) sixteen Republicans to join them.
And, even if they impeached Bush and he were convicted, what would be the reward? Turning on the TV and hearing, “I, Richard Cheney do solemnly swear…”
No, I doubt if Pelosi would want impeachment hearings. Every grain of common sense argues against it.
“No, I doubt if Pelosi would want impeachment hearings. Every grain of common sense argues against it.”
- That’s why we’re sure she’d try it.
- Bang
Ah geez…the troll is at it again.
He’s unable to speak more than a word or two without changing the subject to Foley, mainly because that’s all he apparently thinks he has.
Well, GWR, I think I’ve got it figured out. Keith obviously has the most raging case of homophobia I’ve ever seen. With him, it’s all “who played hide the salami” all the time. I bet he’s even afraid to bend over in his own shower at home alone he’s so hyper.
How else can you explain the fact he views sending dirty IMs as a more serious crime than shooting at and attacking campaign offices?