Nancy Pelosi: Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President

[Douglas Carpenter]

Democrats Won't Try To Impeach President

link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html

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

snip:"Seeking to choke off a Republican rallying cry, the House's top Democrat has told colleagues that the party will not seek to impeach President Bush even if it gains control of the House in November's elections, her office said last night.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) told her caucus members during their weekly closed meeting Wednesday "that impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it," spokesman Brendan Daly said.

Some House Democrats, including ranking Judiciary Committee member John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, have called for impeachment hearings into allegations that Bush misled the nation about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction and that he violated federal law by approving warrantless wiretaps on Americans. 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."

read full article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html



http://www.dontattackiran.org

[wake.up.america]

1. Not that he should not be impeached!!!

[partylessinOhio]

2. Pelosi is off the table.

Remember that old song, "Get a job!"

Edit: typo

[xultar]

11. Too bad you don't get it. You can't campaign on impeaching the guy.

It won't work. The strategy is take it off the table. Win then put it back on the table. Why can't anyone @ DU understand that.

Dean has said the exact same thing. No one bitched about that.

[partylessinOhio]

15. What does this mean to you?

"that impeachment is off the table; she is not interested in pursuing it,"

To me Pelosi is saying forget about it, let Bush skate.

[xultar]

33. Dean has said the same thing. Why not bitch @ him too. STRATEGY.

[partylessinOhio]

38. You keep copying the same statement. I read it the first time.

[xultar]

40. Did I reply to you directly more than once? I'm sorry. Didn't mean to.

[recoveringdittohed]

25. I agree, impeachment wrong way to frame the issue

In my opinion the way to articulate this debate is to say that the current Republican Congress is not doing its job. It is refusing to exercise oversight over the Executive branch. A Democratic Congress would do its job. It would hold investigations where the * Administration has acted inefficiently or acted illegally with the first priority being to stop repeating the mistakes currently being made. If as a by product of that Congressional oversight egregious impeachable offenses are found it would then be the duty of Congress to hold hearings and impeach.

That said I do think that the * Administration has stonewalled and "investigated" itself to the point that we don't absolutely know if the statement * should be impeached is the Truth but in my gut impeachment definitely has a feeling of truthiness.

[merbex]

34. I heard Former Sen Bob Graham say exactly what you say last evening

Win,then investigate

Do not campaign on this

[laugle]

52. I understand it totally and agree with you! The regressives

will continue to ask the impeachment question, and the best answer is to talk of investigations and not jump into that trap they are laying.

We all know that in the end Bush will most likely be impeached when dems control the house.

His criminal acts are so agregious he won't be able to get out of it.

My only question would be "do the dems have the stomach for it?"

Subpoenaland is coming soon......

[cornermouse]

3. I'm starting to wonder; why bother?

If you don't plan to change the things that are so horribly wrong, why bother?

[radio4progressives]

58. I think that is the point . Pelosi might as well be saying :

We think Bush's administration has done the best he could with what he had to work with...

he made some terrible mistakes, but he didn't mean any harm to anyone except those evil terra-ists that are all over the world including American citizens.

what is a poor boy supposed to do after all? Let's just keep the status quo when we take over Congress. We have a few issues we intend to correct, but other than that Bush should not worry about a thing for the next three years.

[Red Knight]

4. And what exactly is the point of Democrats again?

It really is just becoming one big happy party.

Impeachment should never be off the table. Look at the polls. Why on earth would she be afraid of that issue NOW? It makes no sense.

That kind of statement just hurts the Dems within their own party creating apathy. It does nothing to fuel the base. Honestly, they have no clue--the leaders. It's a shame.

[xultar]

12. Dean has said the same thing. Why not bitch @ him too.

[Kahuna]

42. As a campaign issue, it should be off the table. Newt Gingrich

can testify to that.

[Red Knight]

57. Disagree

No, the campaign can't be JUST about impeachment.

But this should be about Bush. I can't believe that the Republicans want to run around during the campagn defending Bush. If they want to make this about Bush--let them.

My guess is it would be better to keep putting Dems on the spot and demanding THEIR ideas and then attacking that---not defending a lame duck president who steps on one scandal after another.

As a political move--I disagree that it should be avoided. Pelosi didn't have to PROMISE impeachment---but saying it's "off the table" does little to rouse the support of angry Dems if they think that nothing will change by sweeping the Repubs out.

Again, the Democrat base IS angry, and what exactly is wrong with firing them up? I find it laughable that the right believes "saving" Bush(29 percent approval rating)is a winning issue.

Would the elctorate overlook all the scandals, the messes, the lies and cover-ups that will surely arise in an impeachment debate and vote the Republicans in just to SAVE Bush?

That strains belief to me.

I just don't see how that helps the Dems with anything politically but can see how it can hurt. Do they honestly want to blast Bush in the campaign and then say---"well, he's not going to be impeached--he's not that bad"? They'll sound wishy washy and confused.

Like I said, they don't have to hold up the impeachment flag at every campagn stop. But insisting it's not even on the table does nothing to help them.

[wurzel]

5. Republicans should be asked about impeachment. Not Democrats.

They after all set the standard for impeachment. Republicans are the one's who should be asked. "If it is shown Bush lied and broke the law will you vote for impeachment just like you did for Clinton?" If not, why not?

[Kahuna]

43. Exactly!!!!!

:yourock:

[loyalsister]

47. They also have some experience

They lost seats in 1998

[Punkingal]

6. She is a loser.

And so are we, as long as she runs things.

[partylessinOhio]

9. 100% agreement there. Pelosi has to go.

Democrats can do better than this. We have many more effective speakers with a brain. We need to move them upfront and back them up.

We are already setup for big loses in November.

Here in Ohio I see Governor Blackwell moving in the mansion. It is a sickening thought. We are doomed.

[xultar]

14. Does Dean have to go? Dean has said the EXACT same thing.

[onehandle]

24. We're wasting our time.

Too many DUers don't think past the headline.

[xultar]

13. Dean has said the same thing. Why not bitch @ him too.

[Punkingal]

20. Because she is the topic of this thread, maybe?

And I am about fed up with snide comments because I am fed-up with the cringing way our leadership deals with everything. They are a PROBLEM!!!!!!

[rzemanfl]

7. That is just disgusting. Dems could win if they said they'd

impeach that asshat. I'm just going to start planning for the coming depression.

[ogradda]

8. Just why the hell not?

Because it's politically incorrect? He's a monster but we might upset someone if we try and ger rid of him?

What bullshit.

[partylessinOhio]

10. If you stand for the truth, it doesn't matter who gets upset.

The crimes and lies of Bush are much more serious than the "offense" that Clinton was impeached for. We need to get real and stop tiptoeing around the Repugs like we are scared of THEM. The Repugs should be scared of what the Democrats will do.

America needs to be saved and impeachment is the first step. Bush must go! Anyone who supports Bush should go too.

[Golden Raisin]

16. And this is why Democrats lose everytime to Republicans.

We have become a party of timidity, acquiescence, hand-wringing and "don't rock the boat". The Republicans & Neocons, on the other hand, play fascist hardball --- and will bury us. Karl Rove & Grover Norquist must pray nightly for continued "leadership" like Pelosi's.

[Lefty48197]

17. A lot of you people must have trouble reading

Here's her quote: "She said impeachment would not be a goal of the investigations, but she added: "You never know where it leads to.""

Is it REALLY that hard to figure out what she's saying? If so, I'll explain it:

The Republicans are trying to use the impeachment issue as a political rallying cry. They want to use the threat of impeachment as a tool to rally their voters and get them to the polls in order to prevent us from taking over the House.

Pelosi's comments were meant to diffuse their argument by stating that impeachment would not be a GOAL, but her comments obviously leave the door wide open to just that.

"She's got to go". Sheesh. Get a grip people. She's one of the best damn voices we have in Congress.

[partylessinOhio]

23. Respectfully, I disagree. Pelosi is weak. She keeps tripping over her

own tongue. That alone detracts from whatever message she is trying to get across.

Leaving the door ajar isn't enough. It is wishy washy.

"We need to do whatever is necessary to get America back," is a better statement.

That plainly takes NOTHING off the table while it sets no specific targets.

[Lefty48197]

44. I think she speaks the Democratic message quite eloquently

Where you're getting the "tongue tripping" bullsh*t is beyond me.

[IndianaGreen]

18. Joe Scarborough: "This is an imperial Presidency and it is dangerous!"

Rightwinger Joe Scarborough gets its, Pelosi misses it! The above quote was given by Scarborough on his show Thursday night. Scarborough was on the Tweety show Friday and he took issue with Pelosi's promise not to impeach Bush. Scarborough said that if there are impeachable offenses one must act on the evidence, not make blanket immunity statements.

Pelosi has failed the Constitution, the Republic, and the American people!

[MoonRiver]

19. I think this is a BAD tactical move.

The fact is that a lot of people, even many Repubs, will vote Dem for the express purpose of getting rid of *. Take that off the table and we lose again, especially when one throws in the bbv factor. Pelosi is an idiot.
:thumbsdown:

[onehandle]

21. This is about 2006. After a Democratic Congress Investigates...

...it Will lead to impeachment.

WE CANNOT RUN THIS CAMPAIGN ON IMPEACHMENT.

[IndianaGreen]

26. If Pelosi is chicken now, she will be chicken later

She should not be leader or Speaker!

What's next for Pelosi, to counsel a future Democratic President to pardon Bush and Cheney?

[JohnnyRingo]

22. I think she's just taking a campaign issue off the table

Believe it or not, the Republicans were planning to use the threat of impeachment to rally their voters to the polls this November:
("If Democrats win in '06....They'll impeach the greatest president since Ronald Reagan"}

I know that sounds funny, but they fear losing in an off year when voters are known for staying home. They know Dems have had it with Republican rule and are afraid we'll show up in droves.

That said...Pelosi can't possibly keep that promise after November, it's not necessarily her call and a lot can happen by then. Consider it a broken campaign promise.

[Red Knight]

27. Let the Republicans use it

I pray this election becomes all about Bush.

The Republicans will get killed if that happens. His OWN party is becoming more apathetic about him by the day. This is a basic philosophy that kills the Dems who care little how THEIR base feels at the moment because they're basically taken for granted.

Would the Republicans have said this is "off the table" if if the situation was reversed? Hardly. They NEVER feared going after Clinton. Never. They spent eight years attacking him for one thing or the other and using any dirty campaign trick in between. If nothing else it fired up their base and strenghened it.

I understand that the Dems can't play so far to the left that they lose in a general election but Bush is hovering around 30 percent in the polls and every day brings a new scandel.

It isn't time to be timid.

Frankly I'd rather lose standing for something than win standing for nothing. Timidity has gotten the Democrats nowhere. There should be serious strategy changes--more agressiveness.

Bush is giving us a lot to work with here.

We should use it.

[IndianaGreen]

28. Like the DLC took the Iraq war off the table as a campaign issue?

History repeats itself because we continue to make the same mistakes. Watch our Dem leaders snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory!

[MH1]

30. ** Gasp ** No! You can't be serious!

Republicans would use "impeachment" as a campaign tactic???

Claim that Democrats only want revenge for Clinton?

And they would motivate their voters to go to the polls that way??

You can't be serious!!!!

:rofl:











:sarcasm:

[JohnnyRingo]

32. I had a "Ditto Head" friend tell me that we can't impeach Buxh

...because that would be two presidents in a row impeached and it would make our government look corrupt and weak.

Maybe it made more sense when he heard Rush say it, but I just started laughing at Limbaugh's desparate attempt to rally the masses against impeachment.

[Kahuna]

41. Agree 100%. The fact the the article states that Conyers is on the

same page is proof of that.

[pdxmom]

29. Twist the talking point

Right now, we're in the middle of a conversation about this administration spying on American citizens. What is spying but an investigation? And we have a faulty poll being touted by the MSM as saying that 65% of the people think it's okay for the the government to be investigating us, for our own good. They say that it's no big deal, unless you have something to hide.

Well, why isn't that the same thing with Congressional investigations? If this administration has nothing to hide, then they should welcome oversight. The Dems need to start focusing, in very clear and straightforward terms, about why the Republicans don't want oversight of this administration. There must be something to hide, otherwise, they would shine light on what Bush and his minions are doing.

It's no big deal to investigate this administration. If they have nothing to hide.

[PATRICK]

31. Dancing to the bullets

Pathetic political skills. This is saying, needlessly, in public, what should only be prudent considerations in planning sessions. More, this is again looking like the people and the law do not matter as much as the fearsome hot air of the esteemed members across the the aisle and their gasbag machine, whose rep is universally in the toilet besides being a total lie.

This typical of the strategy gaffes we have often criticized. Before we even get to the issue just see how this gives the impression of:

Being intimidated by the GOP
Unsure of the people's support
Uncommitted to the duty, the truth and the need
Flipflopping for real(You know it''s for real when the GOP doesn't accuse you when it is obvious)
Giving in before anything really starts when you don't need a crystal ball to see ever giving in is insanely wrong
Being inconsiderate of the real reaction of real people and worrying as much now about the "swing" voters and the angry bush loyalists as they ever did when the polls were for Bush- and in every case putting the activist base and the truth and duty second to their mythical fear or whatever it is.
Giving up publicly a Constitutional remedy needed for exactly what faces us today if the investigations, ALL the investigations bring heinous crimes to light.
Giving the crooks more than the benefit of the doubt but the benefit of the sentence limitation(in this case a wrist slap or tsk tsk)
Overall showing one is out of touch and submissive to the GOP and the media.

What politician wants to, with public leadership statements, to lead by retreating and surrendering and allying with their enemy in bi-partisan destruction of the nation? Apparently, all too often, OUR politicians. We know as well as sense the limitations of the good-hearted Reid and Pelosi. It is the Feingolds who will win and act in the nation's true interests. Ss long as they don't lay their flesh bare at the whim of their enemies with senseless assurances like this.

If you made the mistake of falling into their trap of seeming to back impeachment before the investigations remember how the other guys played it for Clinton. Restoring the law means commitment to the necessary processes. Or do the Democrats prefer GOP rule or anarchy? Screw the MSM. There is only one people's party and ironically, they don't want to govern, don't want to be noticed as such.

[FrogOne]

35. Pelosi always flip flops

Pelosi always flip flops. Remember she backed McKinney at first, calling the scuffle, "a mistake, an unfortunate lack of recognition of a member of Congress," adding “I would not make a big deal of this." A few days later she said, "The Capitol Police do an excellent job." A few days after that, she said, "I don't think any of it justifies hitting a police officer. I don't know if that happened, but I'm just saying if it did happen, I don't think it was justified."

She just sticks her finger in the air and sees which way the wind is blowing.

[IndianaGreen]

36. Impeachment: An Apology the World Will No Doubt Understand

Published on Friday, May 12, 2006 by CommonDreams.org

Impeachment: An Apology the World Will No Doubt Understand
by Doug Soderstrom, Ph.D.

Besieged from within and without, battered from head to toe; the soul of a once great nation is on the line. A nation having lost its standing, humbled to the bare knuckles of its own knees. Heretofore held high, a head bowed in disgrace before an angry world demanding its well-earned “pound of flesh.” A troubled nation floundering…. gasping for breath; out of funds, politically adrift, and bankrupt to the core of its being. Nowhere to turn, down and out, and barring a miracle, dead on arrival as the chickens of its deadly past come home to roost.

Six months from now our nation will be called upon to make one of the most important decisions since that of having entered the Second World War; a decision to tell the world that we, as a people, are proud of our president, George Walker Bush, one who formulated a National Security Strategy based upon a policy of “preventive war,” a military doctrine having established our right to attack any and all foreign entities prior to their having developed the capacity to threaten our country, an arrangement in which we “strike first,” and then, if necessary, “ask questions later.” Or, on the contrary, a decision to inform the world that we, as a nation, made a huge mistake in having chosen to send to the White House, not once but twice, an arrogant administration, one that has brought immense shame upon the American people. It is important that we understand that there are many who have become angry at us in regards to our mistreatment of others. Given the belligerence of an administration on the verge of launching an attack upon Iran (a move that is likely to ignite an all out war in the Middle East), I wish to sound an alarm that there is little time to spare, a brief period in which to make amends, one last chance to tell the people of the world that we are sorry for what we have done, one last chance for us to avoid the coming wrath of an indignant world!

However, an apology means absolutely nothing unless a people are willing to come to terms with, that is, if they are essentially ready to take responsibility for their behavior. Therefore, a brief look at our rather strained relationship with those around the world. As explained in William Bloom’s book, Killing Hope, it is no wonder that our neighbors view us with such contempt: “From 1945 to 2003, the United States attempted to overthrow more than 40 foreign governments, and to crush more than 30 populist-nationalist movements fighting against intolerable systems. In the process, the U.S. bombed some 25 countries, caused the end of life for several million people, and condemned many millions more to a life of agony and despair." Correspondingly, there has been a spate of studies and polls that have documented the fact that the United States has developed a reputation for having behaved badly; that we have become a rather rude, greedy, immoral, and violent bully of a nation; that, as a result of how the U.S. wields its power, it has become a greater danger to world peace than that of North Korea; that the U.S. has caused the world to become a much more dangerous place; that more countries have a favorable view of China than that of the United States; and that few folks believe that the United States takes other country’s interests into account when making international policy decisions. Taken together, the general consensus is that the United States has lost the trust and respect of the world community.

Following that of 9/11, our president managed an amazingly high approval rating of near 90% along with that of a country which had acquired “a whole shit-load of chips” that could have (read: should have) been used to get the world back on our side, since, for the first time in years, the world had been led to feel sorry for us. All would have been fine if the Bush administration would have had a bit of perspective, the foresight, the clarity of reason to realize that this was, in fact, a world problem, a quandary much more suited for that of the global community to resolve. But as most of us now realize, Bush and company (much like that of an egocentrically spoiled child) decided, red in tooth and claw, to flex its muscles, all in order to destroy a world of supposed enemies. Consequently, a short time after having so arrogantly declared that he had earned political capital and that he was going to use it, the president’s approval, within a period of fifteen months, fell to 31%, one of the lowest ratings of any president. Indeed…… an extravagant fall from grace!

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0512-28.htm

[Clarkie1]

37. That's a reasonable and wise approach.

If it came out that Democratic leaders were for impeachment, that could be twisted and used against us making a vote for Dems a vote for impeachment.

Of course, as Pelosi says, you never know where an investigation may lead. If there is to be impeachment we need the evidence first....clear and unambiguous evidence beyond just enough to convince all of us.

[IndianaGreen]

39. Bush himself is the evidence. Bush admitted bypassing FISA!

What more you guys want? I suspect that if Bush were to get caught in bed with little boys, some of you would be repeating the no-impeachment mantra.

It was Democratic cowardice that afforded Bush the opportunity to break the laws as he has, and to wage wars of aggression resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands.

[Clarkie1]

59. I appreciate your outrage.

But calling for impeachment now won't help us win seats in November, and has the potential to do harm.

Nothing else matters at this point.

[LaPera]

45. Pelosi gets it...Its a sound intelligent republican move...

lie about it and don't give your opponents ammunition to use against you...(such as having the republicans on every talk show screaming... SEE, the democrats have no plan they just want to impeach the president).

Much better to run the democratic platform on "checks and balances" that are needed, against a one party system currently in power.

And most of all run on real ISSUES - Don't let the republicans dictate the non-issues (gay marriage, abortion, etc.)

[MrBenchley]

50. You're 100% correct

Voters care a lot more about real issues than a cheap game of "gotcha back"....

[lwcon]

46. My least-favorite current DU meme is...

"You can't run on impeachment," which is the knee-jerk response here whenever anyone complains about the Dems falling for the Repub trap of promising to take impeachment "off the table."

No one is saying that the Democrats should run on impeachment, so can we all retire that straw man?

But the Repubs are somehow successfully "shaming" some of us into promising we won't do it, like it's our dirty business to wash our hands of.

Pelosi is dead wrong to say it's off the table. All she has to do is make her point about things neededing to be looked into and play it close to the vest about where that will lead, like in the latter statement.

And, yeah, I don't care to see Dean acting afraid of the "I" word, either. Our candidates don't have to (and shouldn't) flaunt it, but we don't have to run from it, either. *They're* the ones who are screwing up the country and shutting down all the checks and balances. It's not our job to promise to let it slide.

This is typical Republican message framing, and we've got to be more sophisticated and ballsier about it.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[jenmito]

48. Bush said he'd only use force in Iraq as a last resort.

We know he lied. Once the Dems. get control of the House, THEN they can start talking impeachment.

[lwcon]

49. Fine by me

We can speak softly now, but we shouldn't renounce the big stick.

[jenmito]

51. That's what I'm sayin'...

Pretend we have no intention of impeaching him. We get in power...and WHAM! Impeach him!

[Disturbed]

53. The Rethugs will keep repeating that the Dems intend

to Impeach Busholini, no matter what Dems say. Pelosi and Howard Dean are dead wrong to say it's off the table. Appeasment to Fascists usually doesn't work out very well.

[jenmito]

56. That's why Pelosi SAID impeachment is off the table...

To put those "lies" to rest. It's NOT appeasement-it's a calculated statement. The Dems. know impeachment isn't really off the table.

[lwcon]

61. We aren't the party of liars and shouldn't become that now

We can talk discreetly, but we shouldn't say things that we aren't willing to stand by.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[ekelly]

63. Plus, this is a great way

to pick up votes from repub voters who are fed up with bushco*, as well as from swing voters who aren't sure.

Take away their excuse for voting republican.
Take away the very thing that makes them dig in their heels and defend bush* and his pals.

Brilliant move in my opinion.

[lwcon]

60. Thank you!

Bush's impeachment risk is his own damn fault. We're making a big mistake if we let this false framing stick, i.e., that the Democrats daren't impeach him. It makes no sense whatsoever to appease the media spinners who are trying to make impeachment risk look like a failing on our part.

___

Hey, the liberal light is always on at the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy. Please stop by and say "hi!"

[applegrove]

54. But at the same time, Dems will use their oversight powers of governance

to make sure laws are followed. And they will not deal away anything that entails.

Governance is governance.

[Jack Rabbit]

55. I only hope she can change her mind as new facts warrant

PELOSI FOR PRESIDENT IN 2007
(Whether she wants it or not)

[midnight]

62. Sorry Nancy, but

I'm with John on this one.

[Jodin]

64. Direct Action

Some Democratic Members of Congress have indicated that they're not currently pursuing impeachment. While this is upsetting, they percieve it to be in their (and the DFLs) political best interest. At least until the political pressure builds. There are also other reasons they're waiting. But, one of the things they're waiting for is us. We are part of the process. They're waiting for us to help them out, by legitimizing their support for the process. We must pressure congress in a public way, so the members of congress don't seem 'extreme' when they support impeachment.