Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):
By on Mar 19th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Hoorah, Nancy!
March 19th, 2007 at 2:34 pmThis is the beginning of the end for Gonzales! Hooray!
March 19th, 2007 at 2:34 pmI am glad she found time to say that seeing as though she has been so busy looking for support to extend the Iraq war like she is planning. I must assume since she has the time to partake in this political show trial, she now has most the Dems behind her effort to extend the War. Good for Speaker Pelosi!
March 19th, 2007 at 2:35 pmThank you Madam speaker, now could you please put impeachment back on the table?….Blessings
March 19th, 2007 at 2:36 pmBilly Sitch:
PUT IMPEACHMENT BACK ON THE TABLE YOU CORPORATE WHORE.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pmWe have needed a new Attorney General since this one was appointed. Ashcroft was disgusting and this one is crimminal. Remember Gonzales was the person who thought torture was legal.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:38 pm#4 Sharon Yes, yes, yes, we need to put impeachment back on the table.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:42 pmLike today!!!!
Madam Speaker: changing Gonzalez will not solve the problem..we need to get down to the roots of what happened,motives and reasons.
Bush can name someone elese tomorrow, but will that tell us what happened?
March 19th, 2007 at 2:42 pmYou think! Al Gonzales lied under oath and broke the law by firing lawyers who we not committing the crimes the White House needed them to do. If Al is still the Attorney General look for all convicted criminals who lied under oath to get out of jail as Gonzo has made lying under oath legal and not a crime. Libby will appeal on the Gonzo law and win his freedom. Abramoff and Duke will be released as all they did wrong was lie under oath, the fact that they were committing other crimes will now be dismissed. The only lawyers hired at the DOJ will be lawyers who are criminals and liars. Like V. Toensing is a great person to look stupid while lying under oath. I love it when educated lawyers like Toensing say I really don’t understand the law, but I’ve been a lawyer for 30 years. Good pick Al. With Al Gonzales as Attorney General we have no Justice System in the United States.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:43 pm“I believe we need a new attorney general.â€
Gee, do ya think so? Now put impeachment back on the table for his boss dammit!
March 19th, 2007 at 2:44 pmHappy Clusterf*ck Anniversary Rape-Public-Cans.
How heavy is the water nowadays?
March 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pmIn case you needed any more justification for Gonzales’ departure, see:
March 19th, 2007 at 2:47 pm“Top 10 Reasons Why Gonzales Must Go.”
Just think how much more damage this current bunch of crooks can do over the next 672 days!
There was a post earlier on another subject that mentioned not having impeachment on the table to let this play out : see how many more laws BushCO can break.
On the one hand I would love to see these bastards impeached, but on the other hand it would be interesting to the U.S.S. Mission Unaccomplished go further and further down to the bottom of the sea…
March 19th, 2007 at 2:52 pmDung_Dung
Did you play percussion (banging head on table) for Paul Simon’s recording of “One Trick Pony”?
March 19th, 2007 at 2:56 pmWe’ll pin the accolades on Pelosi when she finally puts impeachment back on the table! Until then, the jury is still out on her ability.
March 19th, 2007 at 2:57 pmThere was a post earlier on another subject that mentioned not having impeachment on the table to let this play out : see how many more laws BushCO can break.
I meant off the table! with the above
March 19th, 2007 at 2:57 pmwe need a new speaker of the house who doesnt suck up to AIPAC
March 19th, 2007 at 2:57 pmGo to this website to send your comments to Nancy
http://speaker.house.gov/contact/
I just sent her the following
Dear Nancy.
I am a loyal democrat who is quite pleased by the story below from the Chicago Tribune where you call for a new attorney general.
Now that you have that out of the way when are you going to call for a new “president” and vice “president”? They have done so much more to undermine the standing of this country than Gitmo Al ever will, yet you are letting them skate. We elected a D majority in November to put an end to the Bush tyranny. Are you willing to let him remain in office another 672 days to continue his jihad on your constitution and mine?? I hope not.
When will we hear about impeachment?
March 19th, 2007 at 3:01 pmYes we DO need another AG…
…and another President…
…Vice President…
…hell just exile ALL conned’self-servative inbred TRAITORS…
…that we don’t use the Patriot Act…
…to prosecute, incarcerate, and impoverish…
STILL Madam Speaker:
…those of us who understand how the House and Senate works…
…realize that successful REMOVAL from office of the President/VP…
…requires SIXTY (60) SENATE VOTES…
…and the OBSTRUCTIONIST, TREASONOUS party-before-country conned’self-servatives (REPULSIVESCUM, Bluedog DEMS and INDEP. alike)…
…are NOT going to do what is necessary to save our democracy…
…unless forced to by the 30% DEADENDERS…
…or are SERIOUSLY sanctioned by the “THINKING” American public…
March 19th, 2007 at 3:02 pm#17- J. Baddo: You are 100% right.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:09 pmNo. We need more subpoenas. Stick a microscope up every Executive orifice and find out what’s going on in the gubmint. Who they are paying off, who they are handing out favors to.
F*ck Gonzo. He’s a low level criminal, given a crappy job by his gringo bosses who are running the real crime syndicate.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:11 pmThere are too many loopholes for Bushco to wiggle out of with Gonzales just let out to pasture. This guy needs to be investigated for ALL his crimes against this country and our people. Call him on the mat for every single treachery. Expose this bastard for all his crimes….they are crimes! And either impeach or indict him or BOTH! Because he isn’t leaving if he gets fired, he just goes to the basement to cook up more evil for Georgie and Dicky. Take away his license to practice law anywhere in this country. Hound and hurt him for all time. He’ll land a job somewhere in the future, unless the Hague gets him, but his ability to make problems for the judiciary in this country as a practicing attorney should end. The ABA will disbar him if he either gets indicted or impeached. Keep holding out for more hearings and investigations – let the committees do their jobs even if he does get fired. Grind this one into the ground, guys……he’s earned it.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:18 pm#21, admire your sentiment, but methinks the chymp might get too much pleasure out of that.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:29 pmFew people know that this administration was actually bought at Wal Mart and made in China.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:34 pm‘Rolling Ethics Back for our Conservatives’
correct me if i’m wrong… (joe’s influence there) …
but i heard randi express the importance of gonzo being INDICTED/IMPEACHED… if he RESIGNS then he can still find similar work…
he needs to be neutered… MY words…
as far as bush/cheney impeachment… it seems those wheels are turning also… thank the gods for SUBPOENA POWER…
March 19th, 2007 at 3:37 pm#18 You are asking Pelosi to impeach? LOL. You do realize that she and Bush just got done working together to extend the Iraq war right? Pelosi isn’t looking to impeach, she has been busy looking for more yes votes from the Dems for her and Bush’s Iraq war spending bill. The Dems are way to busy voting yes to support and extend them war including the escalation to impeach. They would have to impeach themselves as they are still voting yes in support of this war. The only people against the Iraq war are the American public. Congress is lock step with the President.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:37 pm#4 – Sharon
I second that.
Speaker Pelosi, put impeachment on the top of your list, next to getting us out of Iraq.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:40 pmSo, let me ask you guys something. If Gonzales announces today that he is investigating Cheney, can Bush fire him?
March 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pmI believe we need a new speaker.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:52 pmCongress is lock step with the President.
Comment by Roger_Roger
How’s life going for you with one eye? A narrow perspective like yours certainly indicates vision problems.
The reason Pelosi is signing the supplemental spending bill is it’s the only way to get a farm bill through this dilapidated chicken coop called the White House.
By the way, the only mistake Condi made is not being a WH Intern. If she was, Bush would already be impeached.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:55 pmPatrick1:
I agree with you — since she REFUSES to impeach the entire Administration, she should be recalled by her constituents.
March 19th, 2007 at 3:59 pmThe headline should read:
Bought and paid for corporate shill, Nanci Pelosi, tosses a bone to the phony Left do-nothings who think they are ‘Progressive’.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pmPelosi Thing To Do list:
March 19th, 2007 at 4:05 pm1. New AG
2. Impeach Bush and Cheney
3. Follow the money…
lol!! Poor Pelosi. She is such a wimp. She can’t cut funds for the war or impeach Bush, so she goes after Gonza. Pathetic.
Sharon – does that upset you??? Democrats don’t give a sh*t about you. They just want your $$ so they can be in power.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:08 pmNaw… Lets keep the AG that says:
— The President is above the law.
— Can order the torture of Men Women and Children (even rape)
— Can order the imprisonment of anyone deemed by the state as an ‘enemy combatant’. (even U.S. Citizens)
Yeah we need to keep him.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:13 pm–
#33 – are you on crack?? Democrats are too spineless to impeach Bush. They would never get away with it. I wish they would try though. It would help expose the party of hate for what it is.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:14 pmVery soon Pelosi will realize that the honeymoon with the voters that made her a Speaker of the House will be over.
Voters expecting more than empty words..non biding, toothless resolutions.
Pelosi need to stop taking advice and orders from AIPAC,and act as an independent American who looks after voters’ wishes…
March 19th, 2007 at 4:18 pmSo, let me ask you guys something. If Gonzales announces today that he is investigating Cheney, can Bush fire him?
Comment by Jake
Sure. He serves at the pleasure of the President. The question is not if he can fire him, it’s should he fire him.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:21 pmYes…, and… ? Could you please clarify your position on that, Madam Speaker? Are there charges on the table being considered?
March 19th, 2007 at 4:21 pmWe also need a new Speaker who will not cave in to the Israeli lobby and remove key provisions that prohibit the Repug-Neocon Shrub from declaring another war without congressional approval.
March 19th, 2007 at 4:40 pmO.K., wait a second, dlet — are you just pulling my leg? The Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the President and can be fired for any reason, but lower U.S. Attorneys who serve at the pleasure of the President cannot?!
March 19th, 2007 at 4:44 pmWhile we are venting we mustn’t loose site of the overall problem. This administration has drilled down into the rank and file in government positions, putting people in jobs that owe their allegience to him/republican party instead of the people. It’s amazing with all of our problems he and his staff would have enough time to speak with or monitor staff at that level. Further more, we have to listen carefully to what the politicians who are running are saying and who their supporters, associates and assistance, are. There’s an old saying if you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas, so full disclosure of contributers and advisors would be in order. Then being an informed citizen and voting for what is best for the country first is of utmost importance – because when you get right down to it, we did this…by voting for people who we like because they can coin a phrase or have good television appeal and scripting. We gave those running for office the idea that we are superficial and stupid and they can sell us anything as long as it’s sounds good – that we are not really interested in the details or pretty much care about the small stuff, like opening government coffers to the rich contributors and corporations. That we care more about our personal social concerns and we that we pay scant or very little attention to what is good for our country. So every election, they trott out the gay issue, roe v.wade, red-alert, the trial of iragi terrorist, that is old news for those in the know, and I believe in God and they don’t, they’ll keep it in the media and keep talking about it every day – pushing the concept “that politics are local”, so they’ll whip their base into a frenzy over issues that have absolutely nothing to do with foreign policy, and the corrupt activity they have been involved in. Then that base will go and vote according to their feel good personal moral leanings. Leaving the country in a lurch again. I say to Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike, you have to change the way you view and listen to your elected officials, local, state & federal. Especially in the upcoming election. You can’t attribute honesty, fairness and good governance to a person who’s personal life you approve of. We as a people need to be more objective than that. Voting for the country’s best interest before our own will make in the long-term serve our personal best interest.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:00 pmAmerican People to Pelosi: Why have you not initiated impeachment proceedings against Gonzalez already?
March 19th, 2007 at 5:04 pm#41 You forget that this whole “investigation” is really just a political show trial. No one is claiming anything illegal was done. They are simply going for some political points. The cherry on top is removing or disgracing one more politically appointed minority. You, see the Dems view the minorities in the country as a group that is owned by the Dems that simply provides them with votes. The Dems believe that the minorities should be beholden to the Dems and they also believe they should never be in any position of power. You don’t believe me? Which party has a minority as Attorney General, Sec. of State (2 times)? Which party had minorities in those positions first? It is pretty crystal clear in the end which party is against these groups and its a big reason they are attacking them. You just watch. The Dems will now nominate a crusty old white women or man when they have a Black canidate that would easily win. They simply don’t believe in allowing minorities a voice or any power. Pretty sad if you ask me. One of these days, the minority groups will wake up and realize the Dems demand their vote with nothing in return. How long are they planning to fight the “war on poverty”? That “war” has been going on for 30+ years and they still haven’t won. If you wonder why, it is simple. That “war” is already lost and they can’t admit it (kinda like they want Bush to admit defeat in Iraq). The simple truth is that they keep these groups poor so these groups continue to “need” them and thus continue to vote for them. Repugs putting minorities in power positions is just in bad taste in the Dems minds.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:06 pmWhen we get a new AG, can we get some new trolls, too? The current ones have lost every shred of their credibility defending the Bush administration’s criminal obstruction of justice.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:06 pmRoger_Roger:
Good points.
VerbalKint:
How about this guy for Attorney General then?
March 19th, 2007 at 5:13 pm#45 Please please please explain how Bush broke the law when he purged these politically appointed US attorney’s. Honestly I want to know because the law in this regard is very very clear. Maybe I missed something where it says a Repug cannot purge US attorney’s or something like that. Anyways, TP has been making posts on this subject for weeks and has yet to provide the law showing the President cannot purge US attorney’s. Will someone post a link to this law at least.
March 19th, 2007 at 5:14 pm#26. We can always hope. I’m so disgusted with her I had to try.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:01 pm#42. You are exactly correct. My agency has a new Deputy Director who has absolutely no biological background. Couldn’t find his way out of a biology test if required to do so, yet he is now overseeing the endangered species act and the part of the agency that does “battle” with the developers. He’s a political hack from Wyoming who is here as a spy.
http://www.fws.gov/offices/RandallLuthibio.html
These fuckers have only 672 days left in power and I worry repeatedly about the degree and intensity of damage that they are going to inflict on my country, its natural resources, and the psyche of the nation before January 20, 2009. I only wish the Democrats had the guts to impeach these bastards as they deserve to be impeached.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:07 pmYes, Nancy, and a new president and vice president and secretary of state.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:25 pm#42, nice post.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:27 pm# 47 RA RA,
March 19th, 2007 at 6:48 pmA little disingenuous don’t you think ? If after having heard this answer 100’s of times you ask again? Okay roger repeat after me ….OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE …….
Now I know why the republicans repeat the same tired talking points …..their constituency is obviously a little slow ,if your any reflection,and still hasn’t understood them.
Attention deficit disorder is a terrible disease .
freeman:
How many times have you heard us say that “obstruction of justice” cannot include something the President of the United States has every legal right to do?
March 19th, 2007 at 8:22 pmTAKE IT AWAY ONCE AGAIN, GONZO(This time dressed as Eliza Doolittle–Very Appropriate, As Gonzales DID LITTLE GOOD!!!!):
“….CONDOM-Lesser, All I Want is a Post Somewhere,
March 19th, 2007 at 11:07 pmFar Away From Congress’ COLD STARE,
With one enormous Kangaroo-Court chair,
Aow, wouldn’t it be loverly?
Lots of HYENA SHIT for me to eat,
Lots of BRIMSTONE makin’ lots of ‘eat.
Warm anus-face, warm ‘ands, warm feet,
Aow, wouldn’t it be loverly?
Aow, so loverly sittin’ abso-bloomin’-lutely still.
I would never budge ’till spring
Or POLICE crept over my windowsill.
CHIMPya’s DONG restin’ on my knee,
Warm an’ tender as ‘e can be, ‘ho takes good “care” of me,
Aow, wouldn’t it be loverly?
Loverly, loverly, loverly, loverly…..”
How many times have you heard us say that “obstruction of justice†cannot include something the President of the United States has every legal right to do? Comment by Jake — March 19, 2007 @ 8:22 pm
The president doesn’t have a right to do it, if it involves “obstruction-of-justice”. You’re welcome to use the Nixon defense all you want – however – dum bass! It just makes you look ever more st*pid each time you repeat it!
March 20th, 2007 at 2:42 amPelosi you’re just a whole lot of words and no action! You find yourself making a couple more bucks and in a powerful spot riding on a 737 and you take impeachment off the table! How dare you! This country slips deeper into war! Why did we bother electing you as the House Speaker? I knew it! You’re just a whole lot of words and a whole lot of acting but no action! I’m going to grab that whip of yours and whip you into getting the Bush worm out of office!
March 20th, 2007 at 1:31 pmDumb dyke! Get with thew program before there’s a huge grey mushroom cloud hanging over us! You’re just another devil worshipping politician! I KNEW IT!
In order to impeach the president, you have to first establish that he was actually guilty of committing a real criminal offense. Only after the charges are stated can you begin the process of removing him from office………which will not happen since he didn’t do anything illegal. The “impeachment” talk is just political smoke.
April 6th, 2007 at 4:26 pm