Yes, blaming Pelosi is a diversionary tactic. And god damn her for making it possible.

This is the consequence of 8+ years of Democratic weakness. The co-opting of senior Dems into the GOP's criminal conspiracy was only possible because the Bush regime *knew* that Pelosi, et al would not call their bluff.

If Pelosi's first act as Speaker had been to introduce articles of impeachment against Bush & Cheney -- even if they went nowhere -- she would not be in the political pickle she finds herself in today.

Wonder why Woody Woodpecker isn't shown on TV any more?

she's on?

By 2006, everyone *knew* that the Bush regime was nothing more than an organized crime syndicate. And yet Pelosi still took impeachment off the table.

Besides being morally repugnant, it was politically stupid. She opened up herself and every Democrat to this current line of attack.

Of course, I'll presume that you've already judged her guilty... based on your tone. Sounds like you're letting rage over not impeaching cloud your judgement now, to me. Don't get me wrong, I think she should've moved to impeach in '06 or '07 too. Very much. It would've made me very happy.

In this case though, I don't see her behaving pathetically or weakly. Saying the CIA misled the Congress is not a weakness born statement. And, ironically, she seems to be bristling so much at this charge that she seems likely to actually push all the harder for investigations. Hell, the way I see it, she did nothing wrong (now, as opposed to back on '06 & '07)... and the attack on her may actually be the final spark to get the investigations going.
Crossing fingers now...

can we fight today's fights now please?

How much more power do they need before they stand up for what's right?

Right now, this very moment, Obama is setting himself up for exactly the same kind of attack that is being leveled against Pelosi. As president, he *knows* just how far the lies and the torture and the illegal wiretaps and whatever else went and he's still refusing to prosecute. By continually defending and adopting Bush policies, he's effectively making himself into an accessory after-the-fact -- and relinquishing any political power he might have to hold these criminals responsible.

A "D" after one's name is not indicative of ideological leanings. The Senate is full of whores. Whatever she might have done, it would not have gone far.

As for Obama setting himself up... who knows...

But if there's one thing the Pugs have shown, it's that the American people respect strength -- even stupid, bullying, jingoistic strength. And they reject weakness, even when it's the prudent course.

Even if impeachment had turned out to be the politicial equivalent of pissing into the wind, Pelosi would have gained some strong advocates for her position and shown the opposition that she wasn't about to be pushed around.

One thing we might not agree on is the American public's reaction to the predictable media shitstorm should the Dems ever decide to fully and boldly act against the corporatocracy's interests.

Further down the thread, someone posits that the media "fell for" this ruse. I don't see it that way. The way I see it, they are fully aware of the game that's being played... participants in the ruse... the only ones falling for it are those in the public who *still* haven't caught on to this act.

I think there's been a fundamental change in the American electorate. By and large, we are no longer buying what the media is selling. It's critical that we realize the corporate media doesn't have nearly the power they used to in shaping public opinion.

Not sure that's the case now, even... perhaps.

By the time Pelosi took impeachment off the table, the MSM's power was well on its way out.

If the M$M crap convinces *DUers* of that kind of nonsense... what should lead me to believe that average, casual news watchers/viewers can discern reality from M$M spin?

This is the corporate media we're talking about. They don't want to lose their meal ticket by pointing out corporate influence.

You can argue with the conclusion of the poster, but there's no way he's "drinking the MSM kool-aid".

They just hammer away about how nobody likes the bailouts, but he just keeps bailing out those bankers.

And of course there's no such widespread reporting on the things he does that don't fit the narrative. All that stuff just isn't as newsworthy as his "breaking his campaign promise" about abolishing tribunals, and being only willing to help bankers, and never workers.

This is really beyond tiring. It shouldn't be this easy for the M$M to play people... but it so is.

all brothers and sisters.

We told her.

She helped enable the assholes and they turn around and bitch slap her!

Well, it's really more pathetic and sad than funny.

These aren't petty crooks we're talking about, after all. They can destroy careers. And lives.

and if it had more sinister undertones directed at Pelosi.

Pelosi is a diversionary tactic, god damn the media for falling for it.

Most of us saw this coming back in 2006. Why didn't our vaunted Democratic leaders see it?

Nancy are so much easier and require barely any homework.

:eyes:

Wouldn't it be nice if this toughened her up and she came out swinging ..Katy bar the door!

Congratulations, you win the prize. :applause:

Someone in another of these threads pointed out the real question is WHY she took Impeachment Off The Table.

:think:

She's been going along to get along for years now, never wanting to make waves, never wanting to offend, weak and unwilling to confront any major foible of the Bush administration.

I was disappointed the House returned her to the speakership in January. She's not up to the job. We need a speaker who isn't afraid of her shadow.

is making you forget that this CIA has little credibility: they stood by as Bush/Cheney lied to Americans about the link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, or maybe they were complicit. the memo they just released about briefing members of congress has at least 3 mistakes(regarding briefing of former Sen. Bob Graham)and i personally find it very vague for a document from an intelligence agency. really vague.

i think throwing Pelosi under the bus without giving her the benefit of the doubt is crazy. Let's see:

Nancy Pelosi wants a truth commission, republicans resort to thinly veiled threats to democrats in addition to dragging Speaker Pelosi in the mud so that no investigation ever be conducted. they would have found any excuse, any word by some one, any one to distract us. You know that Nancy Pelosi is a favorite target of republicans'.

Nancy Pelosi has not spent the last 8 years abusing human rights. The CIA is full of Dick Cheney sympathizers who, even though they were following orders in good faith to torture, have felt no qualms in keeping people in secret prisons in Bulgaria, in Uzbekistan, and torturing them knowing fully well that these detainees will never get a day in court.

Given what Pelosi has admitted to being briefed on, there is no way she didn't know what was going on.

And given all that, she didn't just fail to introduce articles of impeachment. She actively blocked anyone from introducing articles of impeachment -- even going so far as to threaten John Conyers' committee chairmanship if he pursued his investigations.

your resenting speaker Pelosi is welcomed by republicans everywhere. that she stopped any impeachment initiative does not make her guilty of one thing. this far i have never read or heard that she saw any of the memo written by the Office of Legal Council, or any of the memos from CIA. that's the only way one can know without a doubt that she knew anything precise

you believe there is no way she couldn't know what was going on?

are you asserting that the Bush administration run by Dick Cheney and Karl Rove was leak-prone? i don't think so. Do you mean that the Dick Cheney/Karl Rove administration was not deceitful. Do you believe they only deceived Americans at large? Do you believe they had a policy of being forthcoming and transparent toward democratic members of congress? do you believe that because Dick Cheney, or the other republicans who were with Pelosi during the briefings of CIA activities, all of them are saying "Pelosi was told everything" therefore she knew?