What Pelosi REALLY said was...

[Gwerlain]

"In an interview with The Washington Post last week, Pelosi said a Democratic-controlled House would launch investigations of the administration on energy policy and other matters. She said impeachment would not be a goal of the investigations, but she added: 'You never know where it leads to.'" http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html">Here it is, in black and white.

I don't see "no impeachment." I see "no impeachment unless the evidence warrants it." Which is completely a different thing.

[Iwasthere]

1. YES

That is right. Just give her time.

[Gloria]

2. that's what I heard, too. And, remember, it's better to get all the facts

out first...then, with the Presidential race beginning in about a year, it may be better to skip impeachment and just hammer the facts. That will be political as it is and the GOP will whine like crazy. Add impeachment and they'll whine so much the FACTS will be forgotten....and the media will help them. We'll never get a "bipartisan" impeachment from this crowd like during the Nixon era. Impeaching Clinton didn't help the GOP, so we have to be careful not to be perceived as doing a revenge thing....

[Joe Chi Minh]

5. Getting the facts is not going to be exactly like looking for a

needle in a haystack, is it? There are probably a dozen or more unambiguously impeachable offences.

[keepCAblue]

3. "...investigations of the administration on energy policy..."

So, are we finally going to find out what transpired in Cheney's secret meeting with the big oil companies?

[Kagemusha]

4. But then the terrorists will know too!!

:sarcasm:

[keepCAblue]

7. The terrorists already know -- they attended the meeting. eom

[Gwerlain]

9. Yeah! That's why unka Prick...

will refuse subpoenas! :sarcasm:

[Kagemusha]

14. That's actually seriously what he'll claim in refusing them.

not that it deserves any legal weight mind you...

[Gwerlain]

22. Oh, yes, I don't question that at all. n/t

[sfwriter]

19. What did the terrorists know and when did they know it? eom

[sfwriter]

21. Republicans will impeach him...

Unless you see some way for that albatross around their necks to magically transform into bling by next election. Sure, he'll be leaving anyway, but they can't run as "the guy who let him get away with it."

"It" will be whatever we find over the next year and a half.

[meisje]

6. In order to preserve the rule of law they will have to impeach

[LSK]

8. thank you for giving us what she said

Instead of freaking out and knee-jerking.

Thats exactly what I expect to happen.

[Gwerlain]

11. Yeah, I dug it out because I see a lot of knee-jerking...

going on. I think either we're being freeped or that the M$M is spinning what Pelosi said.

[LSK]

13. MSM spin? no way!

:rofl:

[Rosco T.]

10. Patience blue grasshoppers... patience

in the fullness of time.

[Gwerlain]

12. Indeed. Well said. n/t

[nolabels]

57. Sometimes anticipation is the best part

Especially when there is a miscreant sweating bullets at the other end of the deal :D

[Vidar]

15. Thank you for a sane post on this issue. Recommended.

[understandinglife]

16. Recommended.

BE THE BU$H OPPOSITION - 24/7

[Gwerlain]

17. Thanks, folks! n/t

[in_cog_ni_to]

18. THANK YOU!

sheesh!

:hi:

[gully]

20. And, she has said this on more than one occassion.

Thanks again for pointing this out.

[lamp_shade]

23. Today at lunch she said

"We made history... now we'll make PROGRESS". That looked to me like a little smack up-side bush's empty head.

[happydreams]

24. Kick! I remember that. She is NOT opposed to impeachment and

we all KNOW what Bushie has done. Now when the MSM starts looking like the DU research forum think of how pissed the American people will be!

[Morgana LaFey]

25. I've heard her myself say "Impeachment is off the table," and

she said it in a very flat, firm, no-nonsense tone of voice.

[Gwerlain]

27. Great! Got a link?

After all, I put one up. And in mine, she made it clear that she doesn't oppose impeachment, she opposes pursuing it WITHOUT INVESTIGATION. It's not where you START.

[Morgana LaFey]

30. No, I said I HEARD her, on TV

Could've been CNN, MSNBC, or even one of the network shows, sometime between when we won the House and today (that is, Tuesday or Wednesday).

I said I HEARD her. If you don't want to believe me, AFAIC that's your problem.

[Gwerlain]

31. It's not a matter of whether I believe you...

and for the record, I do. What I don't believe is that that's all she said. Did you read the article I linked?

[Morgana LaFey]

32. Well, I'm hardly responsible for whatever editing gets done,

by corporate media, BUT, the clip I saw didn't look like she was saying anything else that got edited out.

You know -- come to think of it, it may have been in answer to a question asked at her press conference. Maybe you can find a txpt of that.

Let me also say this: I don't care whether she is for or against impeachment and has some "secret plan" to let investigations ultimately lead to impeachement or whatever, or not, ad infinitum. I think it is just crashingly STUPID to say to anyone at anytime that "impeachment is off the tble." In the same way that it's stupid for the U.S. to rule out options it has in foreign affairs (esp. military options, tho I typically oppose them myself). And that doesn't mean she'd have to hold the specter of impeachment over Bush's head, either. Just ignore or deflect the question all togehter -- she knows how to do that.

[Gwerlain]

33. I don't think there's any secret plan...

to do anything. I think it's all out in the open. I think the plan is, investigate.

[DemBones DemBones]

34. I HEARD her say that, too, and it had to be on CNN or MSNBC

(or maybe C-SPAN, which I doubt) because I don't watch network news. Was it edited? Who knows?

I'm very glad to see what she has said in print.

[demwing]

41. LINK HERE

http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/16/nancy_pelosi
(thanks to casus belli for the link)

Look for the segment titled "Impeachment"

Pelosi doesn't just say it, she makes a pledge. Impeachment is "off the table," for Bush AND Cheney.

[Individualist]

63. and, “I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table,”

Pelosi, D-Calif., said during a news conference.

www.nytimes.com/cq/2006/11/08/cq_1916.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1163143545-um2Yc79VbTiHYhQdZ2akxg

She has made herself quite clear on the matter.

[Swamp Rat]

26. Thank you!!

[emulatorloo]

28. kick n/t

[baby_mouse]

29. Imagine my total lack of surprise...NT

[eridani]

35. And not just evidence--public support

All their garbage has to be out on the table for everybody to get a good look at.

[Stardust]

36. If this buncha thugs doesn't deserve impeaching, nobody does.

[bridgit]

37. that's what i've been telling all the bomb throwing head choppers...

what will be will be, and that includes impeachment; but i'd like to see first the disassembling of the no-bid crony contract neocon war-profiteering machine among the top 5 things to pursue immediately!

[casus belli]

38. She was clear. It is "Off the table"

See 60 mins interview "impeachment" segment at Yahoo!.

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/scp_v3/viewer/index.php?pid=16598&rn=49750&cl=1137340&ch=334515&src=news

[demwing]

39. She's Very Clear. Impeachment is OFF The Table - Its A Pledge!

For Bush, and for Cheney.

[bridgit]

43. where do you get that she "pledged" it was off the table...

just curious here

[demwing]

44. Watch the clip

Pelosi says "Off the Table..."

Reporter asks "Is That A Pledge?"

Pelosi replies "Yes...yeah..Of COURSE its a pledge"

Watch the clip, it isn't long, and it's very clear.

[bridgit]

46. i watched it when she said it the first time...

but you're not accounting for what will be discovered from within oversight, there will be no stopping what is to follow with a handful of corroborated fact, proof & discovery in hand

[demwing]

48. I'm not spinning it either way

All I'm saying is that she said the impeachment issue is off the table, she agreed that it was a pledge, and that the pledge includes both Bush and Cheney.

Straight forward.

You spin it, I'm just answering your earlier question.

[bridgit]

49. we have already gone through these machinations prior to the mid-term...

what was said was said with the full knowledge that we were not to give republicans anything that they could stick a stick into and then hoist it into the air with their pig-like pride, to not understand that they would have done so is to not understand your political enemy; now we are eating ourselves over what was said to get us precisely where we are right now = in control of both wells of congress...that was no accident, that was allot of hard work & staying on message & target

and, seemingly, very few people here have any real-time appreciation for what it took to get there/here while maneuvering cautiously up through & between a land-mine strewn field of republican bullshit & dirty tricks pass this word along instead,

united we stand divided we fall; nice talking to'ya

[demwing]

53. Like I said - spin it any way you like

But don't you get snarky with me. I'm in favor of impeachment, but that's not the point at this moment

You asked "where do you get that she 'pledged' it was off the table" so I showed you.

Apparently, a straight forward answer wasn't what you wanted to hear, because now you're lecturing me about not having any "real-time appreciation for what it took to get there/here."

Save it. If you didn't want to hear the answer, you had no business asking the freaking question.

Pelosi said what she said. End of THIS debate.

[bridgit]

55. negative, you can't handle anything other than bush's head on a pike...

but i see no mention of your plans to accomplish that yourself; where i say let process work it's course...you have no admiration for constitutional process? that's your issue & not mine; i've just witnessed 6yrs of what bush's ignoble disregard for the constitution has wrought and i am done with it, let him be hoisted upon the words writ on that paper and not by what others either say, or think they have said THAT is part of the beauty of America...legal process, and Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well does not set, nor sanction legal process all by herself she is not a fool

funny here in GD so often, someone actually has something to say and someone thinks they're being snarked as a result = pft, whatever dude :rofl:

[demwing]

56. Oh please, your disdain is shattering

I'm devastated.

Well, no I'm not. Not one bit. :rofl: :rofl:

Do you really think you're the only one who has suffered through the last 6 years? Are you THAT self-centered? You have no idea what the Republican mess has done to me and my family. You have no clue.

But that is NOT the immediate issue. The immediate issue that was being discussed is whether of not Pelosi said impeachment was off the table, and whether she said that the "off the table" remark was a pledge

She did, in clear language. END OF STORY.

If you want to have a separate discussion about whether she meant it, thats fine with me.
If you want to make a point that Pelosi was doing and saying whatever is required to take power, thats fine as well.

But don't pretend you didn't ask me to show my source for Pelosi's "pledge." You asked, I answered. It should have ended there without a problem. But you decided you didn't like what Pelosi was saying, and somehow let lose on me, as if her words reflected my values.

And that's just ignorant.

Climb off your high horse and don't lecture people for posting the facts, just because it displeases your sensibilities.

[bridgit]

61. pft-bhwahaha....

:spray: then stand with the rest in silence and be taught proper governance in the fullness of time you rube :rofl:

[demwing]

70. Why do insist on being ignorant?

You have no idea where I stand.

I repeat, you have no idea where I stand.

The only thing you seem to care about is that you opened your mouth too much, and now must flame away in an effort to hide the fact that you were embarrassingly wrong about what Pelosi said.

You were wrong. Get over it, and stop blaming just because I pointed out the facts.

[bridgit]

71. you have yourself a lovely evening...

[CrazyForKucinich]

If it's off the table we need a new leader

If they broke the law they should be impeached.

So much for fucking justice in this country.

[CrazyForKucinich]

40. If it's off the table we need a new leader

If they broke the law they should be impeached.

So much for fucking justice in this country.

[casus belli]

42. Sure, Let's remove the first Woman Speaker of the House

because she refuses to go to War to prosecute a President for starting a War.

I follow you.

[CrazyForKucinich]

50. That's a cheap shot at our troops.

Prosecuting the President isn't war. Comparing it the hell our troops have to go through every day in Iraq and Afghanistan is pretty fucking low.

[casus belli]

59. The war comes in dividing the country 50/50

I am not an apologist for the President. Nothing would give me more pleasure than to see him spend the rest of his miserable fucking life behind bars, but impeachment will not accomplish that. It will only remove him from office.

I'm not ruling out impeachment. But I'm not calling for it either. Without charges, there is no basis for impeachment, so the logical first step would be investigations. Let's start there and move on.

[Mythsaje]

45. I think she's a smart woman...

And she knows how close they should hold their cards until the time comes to show their hand.

We could all take a little lesson in that.

[bridgit]

47. correct...

[Duppers]

51. some here need to hear that

Thanks, Gwerlain.

[shadowknows69]

52. We need to add an impeachment clause to the Constitution

For chronic and obvious incompetency.

[MGD]

54. I'll second that motion.

[loyalsister]

58. That's totally appropriate

Unless we want to follow impeachment rules defined in pursuit of Clinton, neither our congress persons nor we should assume impeachment would be the inevitable result of any investigation at this point.
"On the table" would imply a forgone conclusion prior to independent investigations.

[yodermon]

60. This article is from May.

Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 12, 2006; Page A06

Although, I do believe that if House investigations get underway, enough shit will rise to the surface that Darth & Chimp will both resign. She knows this, and it gives her cover for saying "I pledge that impeachment is off the table" (because we won't have to, nudge nudge wink wink).

[mom cat]

62. The evidence surely warrants it!

[Dora]

64. Spot on. Innocent until proven guilty. Aboslutely. Play by the rules.

Investigate first. Impeach after.

[Homer Wells]

65. I can imagine the scenario after the investigations

have begun.

The investigations will undoubtedly bring into public many egregious acts committed by BushCo, there will be a clamoring from both sides for more information, and it will grow and GROW.

Speaker Pelosi will make a statement to the effect that , although she DID make a pledge of not seeking Impeachment, since these facts have been discovered, and they are such terrible,and impeachable offenses, as an officer of the law, she has no choice but to open Impeachment hearings. It grieves her no end to have to go back on her Pledge, but "the law is the LAW", and she knows the American People INSIST the law be upheld, so Impeachment investigations MUST GO FORWARD.

Seems pretty logical to me.

:popcorn: :popcorn:

[porphyrian]

66. Oh, the evidence is going to warrant it like a motherfucker. - n/t

[Gwerlain]

67. Of course it will. We all know that, if we've been...

surfing the 'Net much. But let's admit that RIGHT NOW, the evidence needed to impeach DOESN'T LEGALLY EXIST. What kind of training and background do you think most congresscritters have? They're LAWYERS, people. That means they know how to amass and present evidence. And that's how this deed gets done. You think we know it all? Hell no, there's plenty more rocks to turn over and plenty more squirmy white things to watch trying to crawl away from the daylight. I wanna see it ALL.

I suspect there's more hits coming for the administration this year; I mean this month and next. By the time the 110th Congress sits down, the situation is likely to be entirely different from what it is now. How many whistleblowers are right now breathing a sigh of relief, and how many potential ones are suddenly feeling their outrage over what they have seen, and guilt over not bringing it to light, and will be pushed by it into coming forward? And now that the opposition controls Congress, do you imagine there will be any failure to enforce the whistleblower protection laws? When a failure to enforce them could land you in front of a hostile Congressional committee? We're gonna get a lotta looks under a lotta rocks. '07 is gonna be a great year. I'm gonna have a real good time watching them hunt these fuckers down, and an even better time watching them try to find cracks to hide in while the foot comes stomping down.

I don't think you get to a position of leadership in the House by being nice. I don't think you get there by being dumb, either. I think anyone who thinks Nancy Pelosi is gonna play nice, or isn't very bright, is seriously "misunderestimating" her. She knows which side of the bread the butter's on. And she's a committed Democrat. Y'all wanna have the climax of the party at the beginning. She wants it at the end. I think she's right.

In addition, I posted on my Conyers thread that I finally saw a quote- this morning was the first report I could find- that he agrees with her. What that means is that she has convinced him she's right. And that don't mean "bullied" by threatening not to let him be committee chairman- I don't think there's a person alive who could bully John Conyers. He wants Shrub so bad he can taste it. If he's sittin' down with her, he thinks he's gonna get him. That's my read.

[porphyrian]

69. Why make that distinction at all?

It's a given that the evidence needs to be compiled. Who do you think is stupid enough here to believe we should go to court empty handed? Come on.

[garybeck]

68. Didn't Dean say impeachment is "not going to happen."

[Red Right and BLUE]

72. YES, wish I could REC. nt