Once impeachment was 'off the table' cheney rolled up his sleeves.

[spanone]

Pelosi made a serious tactical error. IMHO

Now were seeing the a fearless, unstoppable cheney.

Think about it, he has no fear. No one can touch him. Congress gave him a free pass.

I'm not a Pelosi basher, but I think she made a serious mistake on impeachment. She should have kept

it as a real threat.

[sellitman]

1. Threat?

It should have been her 1st order of business!!!!!

:grr: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[pat_k]

2. A preemptive surrender to fascism. Intolerable.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/22

[Dinger]

3. At What Point Will We Have An American Revolution, Part II?

I'm thinking we're pretty close.

[EFerrari]

4. I don't understand how it made sense for her to do that.

Who was she trying to reassure or impress with conservatism? :shrug:

[leftchick]

6. the centrists

the so called democratic centrists seem to make up the majority in congress these days. Thanks to the efforts of the DLC. Mission accomplished.

[bvar22]

19. Not the "Centrists" represenatives per se,

but the Large "Single Sourse" contributors (CEOs) who own the "Centrists" and give them their orders.

Pelosi had to send them (Big Money Lobbyists) a "Business as Usual" message to keep the bribe money rolling in.
Then she added a ThankYou to the blowjob with a "Secret Free Trade" deal negotiated directly with Bush without input from LABOR or the Democratic Caucus.

The mega-RICH can't have an Impeachment fucking up the $Money Machine$. And NOW, Nancy has a seat at their table.


The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[MrPrax]

5. Right Said...

I rationalized when she said it that it was simply being done to mollify the 'right' of the party -- after all she's a politician and since when do they keep a campaign promise. Well for some reason and certainly not for strategic purposes, she is keeping this promise she made to the Administration...they won't even impeach on BEHALF of American citizens as is there duty.

Boy...quite a few people got that one wrong. I assume there must be envelopes sitting in safety deposit boxes somewhere really calling the shots on this one.

[DeSwiss]

7. While it may indeed have been a tactical error....

...I see it more as a horrendous strategic error. By allowing Bush/Cheney to operate with impunity, Congress is allowing the Executive Branch to assume greater powers than the Constitution allows.

Example: signing statements. Its even better than a line item veto...

[The Backlash Cometh]

8. Of course. battered wife syndrome is only half of the formula.

The other half requires a bully who will not stop beating you until you're six feet under.

[soothsayer]

9. Well, it's time to put it back on the table given these 'new' revelations.

[Liberal Veteran]

10. Does she have a magic pen that makes it impossible to put it back on the table?

Impeachment is just as much a threat today as it was the day before she made that statement.

The notion that somehow if Pelosi would not have said that, Darth Cheney would be less arrogant and in your face about his legal fictions and idiocies is laughable.

Cheney is an evil person, but not exactly a stupid person. A stupid person would believe that Pelosi was giving him a free pass by saying that. An intelligent person would know damned well that Pelosi still has the option to impeach.

[spanone]

11. Then I guess by your account I'm a stupid person.

[Liberal Veteran]

15. Two questions:

1) Does she still have the power to impeach?

2) Does Dick Cheney know that?

It's really that simple. I just find wanting to blame Pelosi for Cheney being an arrogant and evil son of a bitch to be silly.

Plus the fact you ignored that she said impeachment of the Idiot Son was off the table. She never said a thing about Cheney, so your premise is based on a faulty assumption.

Plus she never said it could not be back on the table should and said it could happen when asked.

Russert asked her: "Is impeachment off the table?''

Pelosi said, "Well, you never know where the facts take you, but -- for any president -- but that isn't what we're about. What we're about is going there and having high ethical standards, fiscal soundness and a level of civility that brushes away all this fierce partisanship.''

[spanone]

23. Well then I guess she will start impeachment proceedings any day now.

I'm holding my breath.

[Liberal Veteran]

25. So you really want her to start proceedings knowing the Senate won't convict?

Hell, we need two thirds to find him guilty and so far we can't even get two thirds of the Senate to override a veto of stem cell research or providing money for birth control.

At this point, until we have something even the republicans cannot rationalize away, impeachment is a waste of time.

[spanone]

28. Never said she would. Wish she would. Can't fail if you don't try.

[Liberal Veteran]

30. So you want her to indulge in the fate of Sisyphus?

Forever rolling a boulder up a hill?

She could do what you want today....AND FAIL.

And the next time she tried, it would be that much more difficult.

I didn't realize you had such disdain for Pelosi that you would compel her to do the impossible to satisfy your anger at Cheney.

I hate the man with the heat of a thousand exploding suns and think he is evil incarnate, but even with that I know that what they have at the moment is nothing more than arrogance and contempt to charge him with and what we have on him now is NOT going convince Lieberman and his allies in the republican party to convict.

[KittyWampus]

37. Not stupid, just reactionary.

[ozymandius]

34. and that's why Cheney still destroys incriminating evidence.

Smart evil people know that table can turn against them.

[Caution]

12. Oh Please. He hasn't behaved any differently since day one.

From the moment he got into office his actions have been nothing more than a big "fuck you" the the people and to the Constitution.

[spanone]

16. I believe that enforcing laws deters criminals....cheney is a criminal with immunity.

[Liberal Veteran]

18. Oh come on. Now you are just making shit up.

She didn't give him immunity to anything.

She wasn't even talking about Cheney when that statement was made (she was responding to a direct question about impeaching Bush on 60 minutes).

[acmavm]

13. You are exactly right. I've said this before, and others have too.

She gave that criminal traitor a green light to even bigger and better treasons.

[mmonk]

14. Well before actually but yes, he could roll up his sleeve

and continue unabated.

[frazzled]

17. He's had his sleeves rolled up since 2001

The secret energy policy meetings, the manipulation of prewar intelligence ... all this has been going on since 2001. It's only the details that have (re) emerged lately--thanks to Democratic oversight in House and Senate committees. I respectfully submit that the argument in the OP is bull.

[kenny blankenship]

20. or MAYBE she was tempting Cheney-Bush Admin into overplaying their hand!

Pretending to take impeachment off the table forever, emboldening them to act with even greater arrogance than before in ways that necessitate impeachment! She was playing possum and suckered them!

No, I don't believe it either.

[Robson]

22. Yes .... but Boehner and the Republicans didn't promise

I agree Nancy Pelosi never should have made the promise. As Bush has often said all options must be on the table.

It's not beyond the pale that the Republicans in the House wouldn't press Pelosi to go forward with impeachment charges. Bush doesn't have many friends right now and if he continues to push his immigration bill he'll have even fewer friends.

Added: Those Republicans up for reelection in 2008 will be grasping for straws to regain respect from their constituents after the long 8 years of Bush era "fiascotivity" or is it "fiasconess".

[Pachamama]

35. Yep, and saving that gun powder for another time....

:eyes:

I'm sorry to have to say this, but watching how the Democratic Party has been handling their job as majority has been rather disappointing....Don't they remember how they were treated as the Minority? Didn't they learn anything?

The irony is that in the Majority they seem to be doing little different than before....Bush and Cheney are laughing and know that no one will stop them....

[TahitiNut]

21. Well, d'oh! When cops go on strike, what do thieves do??

(sheesh!)

[KittyWampus]

39. And what do thieves do when cops aren't on strike? THEY STEAL. Because they're thieves

how assinine.

[smoogatz]

24. Once Cheney saw that the Democrats held only a paper majority in the Senate

--nowhere near the two thirds they'd need to get a conviction--he sneered his crooked sneer, lit a fat cigar, cracked his knuckles, and continued to plan the bombing of Tehran. Pelosi was simply stating the facts--impeachment IS off the table, because conviction is impossible. Impeachment without conviction would be the emptiest of empty gestures. What's interesting, though, is Cheney's claim that his office is not an entity of the executive branch. That would mean, I'm pretty sure, that he is no longer protected by executive privilege (can't have it both ways, I don't think). It's true that he can't be impeached, but as a non-executive, he can be tried and imprisoned for crimes in office just like any other member of the legislative branch. Let the subpoenas begin!

[Liberal Veteran]

26. Bingo. Tilting at windmills would be stupid.

I wish people would temper their feelings with realism.

[spanone]

29. You're realism is do nothing. That's worse than failure.

[Liberal Veteran]

31. Did I say do nothing? Don't give me binary choices.

That's a right wing tactic: Do my thing or nothing....there is no other course of action.

It didn't work when the talking heads on the right said it about Iraq ("Well, I guess you would have just done nothing to make sure Saddam didn't pose threat since you don't support the war!") and it damn sure ain't going work here.

[spanone]

32. Hey man, what's your fucking beef. Call me a right winger and kiss my ass

Why don't you illuminate this thread with your perceptive take on this subject since that's all that matters to you anyway?

[Liberal Veteran]

33. Lol.....then don't put words in my mouth.

Or try to assume my thoughts are to only do nothing.

There are a million options between impeachment (which is only going to be successful if you have the goods to convince two-thirds of the senate) and doing nothing. Demanding we impeach when you know it can't possibly result in a conviction in the senate is not a strategy....it's futility.

You are the one claiming that somehow Cheney has been given immunity (which is totally untrue) and that it's all Pelosi's fault he's an arrogant prick.

I'm content to wait until we got the goods to nail Cheney's ass to the wall. Things are already unraveling for the Office of the Vice President since he has publicly declared himself to be not part of the executive branch and also declared he has executive privilege.

As near as I can tell, Pelosi said NOTHING about impeaching Cheney no matter how you twist her words, and she sure as hell hasn't given him any kind of immunity.

[jasmeel]

27. It IS and should be ALWAYS on the table for ANY president! n/t

[lonestarnot]

36. Of course it should be!

[KittyWampus]

38. Yeah, Cheney really showed restraint when starting Iraq War II, outing Plame

instituting torture etc etc and all his other outrages which occured BEFORE Pelosi was leader.

What a steaming pile of nonsense this thread is.

[bigtree]

40. Pelosi responsible? The article yesterday said the recent abuses began in 2003

. . . the lengths folks will go to blame our own Democrats for administration malfeasance is amazing. NO ONE is more responsible for what Cheney has done than CHENEY himself.

He has NO free pass, no matter what anyone says about impeachment off the table. It makes no sense at all to whine endlessly about her statement. Investigations are proceeding quicker than they were begun in Congress during the WQatergate scandal, and we don't even have the benefit of some outside trial and conviction, and a 'John Dean', like they did nearly a year before they brought articles of impeachment. Our committees are already charged with the task and investigations are underway.

But it will never be good enough for folks who now have to find justification for all of the frustration they've directed toward the Democrats who are doing the hard work as we speak to uncover the administration abuses and hold them accountable.

The efforts of our Democrats will NEVER be enough for some.