or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Pelosi May Have Committed A Felony
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Pelosi May Have Committed A Felony

post #1 of 170
Thread Starter 
http://opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009908

The author of the above opines that Nancy Pelosi may well have committed a felony by traveling to Syria and communicating with a foreign government positions that differ from the Administration's. According to the article, the Logan Act prohibits the very same.

I've remained silent on Pelosi's trip and prior to reading this I knew nothing of this Act. Up until now, my feeling was that Pelsoi was just continuing her pattern of looking ridiculous. I've said for months now that Pelosi was acting like it's been election night since...well, election night. I half expect her to declare, yet again, "Democrats are ready to lead!" as she speaks overseas.

Moreover, I've felt that her trip was not helpful in that she was going way beyond fact finding or a goodwill visit, so to speak. Travel for Members of Congress is important, as the author himself states. But the Speaker of the House does not conduct foreign policy and has no authority whatsoever to do so. Such "state visits" are the sole pervue of the Administration. Is anyone aware of Hastert doing something similar?

Given Pelosi's actions since assuming the speakership, it's hard not to believe she thinks the election was about anything other than her. First we hade the previously mentioned statements about "Democrats are ready to lead!" and what not, repeated as nauseam. Then it was the hoopla over the first female speaker, some of which was deserved. But she's accomplished precisely jack shit since assuming the role. She looked like a fool when she failed to install Murtha. She accused the President of putting the "surge" troops in harm's way just to secure more war funding...then backed off the statement when questioned about it. Then she essentially pork-bribed her own party to vote for the war supplemental, a piece of legislation that she knew was going to be vetoed anyway.

I'll stop there, and finish with the fact that I don't think anything will come to fruition wrt to felony charges. As for whether or not she's long for the job...well that's another matter.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #2 of 170
I read that this morning.

Felony or not, I've never seen this sort of fawning coverage for the Speaker of the House while making a foreign 'visit' -- or anywhere else for that matter.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #3 of 170
So has David Hobson, part of her delegation, also committed a felony? Robert Aderholt? Frank Wolf? Arlen Specter? John Kerry?

The state department briefed Pelosi for her trip. Are they accomplices?
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #4 of 170
You know sometimes reading some of the threads you see here now days reminds me of reading the headlines for " The Star " or " The Enquirer ".

" Baby Has Horse Hoofs And Horns! "

In this case inquiring minds are yawning.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #5 of 170
... the ends justify the means if it means undermining the president. To hell with the foreign policy territory accorded the executive branch.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #6 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder View Post

Are they accomplices?

Yes.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #7 of 170
It's good to talk..

But apparently illegal to talk about peace in the middle east. If you're an American.

LMAO.
post #8 of 170
I was wondering how long it would take for someone to post that.

Quote:
a House Republican delegation, consisting of Reps. Frank Wolf (VA), Joe Pitts (PA), and Robert Aderholt (AL), met with Assad on April 1, three days before Pelosi spoke with the Syrian president. As the Associated Press reported, the delegation's statement declared, "We came because we believe there is an opportunity for dialogue ... We are following in the lead of Ronald Reagan, who reached out to the Soviets during the Cold War."

Did I miss your post criticizing those Republican Reps?
Quote:
The AP later quoted Wolf saying, "I don't care what the administration says on this. You gotta do what you think is in the best interest of your country."

Quote:
Republican Rep. Darrell Issa (CA) met with Assad on April 5, a day after Pelosi's meeting. As the AP reported on April 5, Issa said President Bush had failed to promote the dialogue that is necessary to resolve disagreements between the United States and Syria."

Quote:
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states: "The Congress shall have Power ... [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations" and "[t]o declare War."

This anti-Pelosi business is really making you guys look ridiculous. Article II, Section 2 articulates the president's powers regarding foreign policy, which include the participation of Congress:
Quote:
He [the president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United State, who Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be establish by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

By the way, didn't the Iraq Study Group recommend that type of dialogue? You know, the study group featuring James Baker, Eagleburger, Meese?
post #9 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by OfficerDigby View Post

It's good to talk..

But apparently illegal to talk about peace in the middle east. If you're an American.

LMAO.

...and not authorized to conduct foreign policy maneuvers.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #10 of 170
SDW... we may just as well let Pelosi have a mulligan on playing the freelance diplomat. She's going to get a pass on it even if technically she is a felon. Ya see, when you complain about Bush and the right, you are patriotic. Same for when you trash our nation's soldiers and our dually elected leaders. When you complain about the left you are an evil Bush-loving winger who should be mocked incessantly. Come on, man. Get with the program.

I personally think you deserve a recess appointment.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #11 of 170
You guys are great. Living in your own little dead ender 25% world, where the WSJ editorial page is an unimpeachable source and endless stories about the Pelosi "controversy" is "fawning".

Do they put a chip in your head? Is it like Mission Impossible, where they've got you in a room somewhere with fake TV shows and people wearing latex masks? Is it just that none of you do anything but read right wing blogs, anymore? Or is it just bitterness, that every aspect of your world view keeps crashing and burning?

Whatever it is, it's startling.

Hey, you know what happened today? Monica Goodling, the Justice Department official who wanted to take the fifth before Congress, which would have been the first time for such a thing in modern times, resigned.

Gee, wonder if that has any significance? Nah..... hey! Look! Obama has a booger on his nose! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #12 of 170
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to post that.

Did I miss your post criticizing those Republican Reps? This anti-Pelosi business is really making you guys look ridiculous. Article II, Section 2 articulates the president's powers regarding foreign policy, which include the participation of Congress:

By the way, didn't the Iraq Study Group recommend that type of dialogue? You know, the study group featuring James Baker, Eagleburger, Meese?

Did they meet with President Assad? Hmm? I stated quite clearly that Congressional travel for the purposes of fact finding, goodwill, etc. was all completely appropriate. Pelosi clearly went beyond that. Don't you agree?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #13 of 170
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

You guys are great. Living in your own little dead ender 25% world, where the WSJ editorial page is an unimpeachable source and endless stories about the Pelosi "controversy" is "fawning".

Do they put a chip in your head? Is it like Mission Impossible, where they've got you in a room somewhere with fake TV shows and people wearing latex masks? Is it just that none of you do anything but read right wing blogs, anymore? Or is it just bitterness, that every aspect of your world view keeps crashing and burning?

Whatever it is, it's startling.

Hey, you know what happened today? Monica Goodling, the Justice Department official who wanted to take the fifth before Congress, which would have been the first time for such a thing in modern times, resigned.

Gee, wonder if that has any significance? Nah..... hey! Look! Obama has a booger on his nose! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!

Don't be an asshole. Comment on the topic or don't post. I was quite clear in presenting the article as opinion. I never held it up as impartial. I made clear distinctions between appropriate and inappropriate travel. Yet you're too busy insulting anyone who dares criticize Madam Speaker! What wingers we are!
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #14 of 170
By Scott Adams

"I’m so jealous of countries that have governments. How cool would that be?

Many years ago, the United States had a government that did impressive things such as winning wars, spreading democracy, and solving huge social issues. In time, it turned into a government that was good at getting blown and tattling. Then we had a government that was too incompetent to do even that. Now we no longer have a functioning government of any kind. The good news is that we seem to have reached a plateau.

Recently our so-called Speaker of the House was meeting with the Syrian government while our so-called Vice President was on Rush Limbaugh’s radio show reminding the world that the so-called Speaker of the House doesn’t speak for the United States in foreign policy. Foreign policy is the job of the so-called President who doesn’t speak to governments that don’t already agree with him.

Today I read that the Defense Department is releasing a report that there was no link between al-Qaeda and Iraq, at the same time that so-called Vice President Cheney was repeating his mantra that there was indeed a link. My tax dollars paid for all of that. I don’t think I got my money’s worth.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are poised for a big win during the next election based on their excellent track record of doing nothing for years. Doing nothing might not sound like a good strategy to you, but if you compare it to what happens when the government actually does something, you can make an argument.

A good test of whether you have a government is this: Can your country do anything big and important? For example, could the United States start a new war, or end an existing one, or change its dependence on foreign oil, or provide health care to all citizens? Apparently not.

At this point, the so-called government does little more than provide content for news channels and blogs. I think they should do more. For example, I’d like to see Congressmen and Congresswomen run across a field of rakes every morning to get to work. For me, it would only take a few rakes in the face per day to make me feel as if my tax dollars weren’t a complete waste.

Is that too much to ask?"
post #15 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Did they meet with President Assad?

Did you not read his post? It said quite clearly that they did.

Here's a link with a photo that shows Assad meeting with Frank Wolf, Joe Pitts, and Robert Aderholt.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...383862,00.html

I will ask again. Do you think these lawmakers also may have committed a felony? If not, what is the difference?
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
A good brain ain't diddly if you don't have the facts
Reply
post #16 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

SDW... we may just as well let Pelosi have a mulligan on playing the freelance diplomat. She's going to get a pass on it even if technically she is a felon. Ya see, when you complain about Bush and the right, you are patriotic. Same for when you trash our nation's soldiers and our dually elected leaders. When you complain about the left you are an evil Bush-loving winger who should be mocked incessantly. Come on, man. Get with the program.

I personally think you deserve a recess appointment.

For someone who claims to be neutral on the democrat, republican, do I support Bush question it's clear where your loyalties are.

And this thing with Pelosi as a felon is just desperate. If it was a real concern we'd be reading about it everywhere. Not just in an editorial opinion.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #17 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

You guys are great. Living in your own little dead ender 25% world, where the WSJ editorial page is an unimpeachable source and endless stories about the Pelosi "controversy" is "fawning".

Do they put a chip in your head? Is it like Mission Impossible, where they've got you in a room somewhere with fake TV shows and people wearing latex masks? Is it just that none of you do anything but read right wing blogs, anymore? Or is it just bitterness, that every aspect of your world view keeps crashing and burning?

Whatever it is, it's startling.

Hey, you know what happened today? Monica Goodling, the Justice Department official who wanted to take the fifth before Congress, which would have been the first time for such a thing in modern times, resigned.

Gee, wonder if that has any significance? Nah..... hey! Look! Obama has a booger on his nose! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!

Well I guess that "well-reasoned" and "intellectual exchange" thing is out the window. It was nice while it lasted...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #18 of 170
This is really a stretch.

The author is dusting off a statute from 1799 that apparently no one was ever convicted under and only one person over 200 years ago was ever even indicted under.

Keep trying guys.
post #19 of 170
It's like my fiancee says. Pelosi makes Republicans and these power-starved dorky guys that are "keyboard warriors" really nervous. Why? Because she's a strong woman.
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
post #20 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquatic View Post

It's like my fiancee says. Pelosi makes Republicans and these power-starved dorky guys that are "keyboard warriors" really nervous. Why? Because she's a strong woman.

OK. I can quit the board now. I have heard it all.

If you have ever criticized Condi Rice, you are a hypocrite then. You must dislike her because she is a strong woman.

This is an amazing demagoguery, even for this board.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #21 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

OK. I can quit the board now. I have heard it all.

If you have ever criticized Condi Rice, you are a hypocrite then. You must dislike her because she is a strong woman.

This is an amazing demagoguery, even for this board.

Condi Rice. A strong woman? She's a yes woman for Bush you mean.

Not my idea of a strong woman who thinks for herself.

Did I hear right?

So you're leaving?

Or just coming back with another handle?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #22 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Did they meet with President Assad? Hmm? I stated quite clearly that Congressional travel for the purposes of fact finding, goodwill, etc. was all completely appropriate. Pelosi clearly went beyond that. Don't you agree?

Most certainly don't agree. I posted the representatives quotes but I think you missed them. They wouldn't agree with you either. You are so off base here I wish it was April 1st....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

For someone who claims to be neutral on the democrat, republican, do I support Bush question it's clear where your loyalties are.

Was there ever any doubt? I mean, not even close.
post #23 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilsch View Post

Most certainly don't agree. I posted the representatives quotes but I think you missed them. They wouldn't agree with you either. You are so off base here I wish it was April 1st....Was there ever any doubt? I mean, not even close.

No there was never any doubt.

I just thought I would drag it out in the open and make it official.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #24 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Don't be an asshole. Comment on the topic or don't post. I was quite clear in presenting the article as opinion. I never held it up as impartial. I made clear distinctions between appropriate and inappropriate travel. Yet you're too busy insulting anyone who dares criticize Madam Speaker! What wingers we are!

I am commenting on the topic, it's just that it's larger than you think it is.

It comes in the context of the Kerry "hates the troops" fake scandal, the Harry Reid "transfered ownership of his house" fake scandal, the Pelosi "demanded a big airplane" fake scandal, the Hillary "southern accent" fake humiliation, and the Edwards "why doesn't he step down" fake concern for his family.

Each and every one of which you started a thread on.

Honestly, I'm surprised you didn't get around to the "CNN reporter heckles McCain" fake scandal, and the "Pelosi wears head scarf in solidarity with terrorists" fake scandal. Guess there are only so many hours in a day.

I comes in the context of your simultaneous blithe dismissal of things like the grim prospects in Iraq, the politicalization of the Justice Department and outing of a covert CIA agent for political payback. I don't see any threads about McCain's little surrealist theater stunt in the Baghdad market, which actually speaks to the status of a shooting war that get Americans killed, or the fact that several of the Republican presidential candidates think that the president ought to have the authority to arrest and incarcerate Americans without any review or oversight.

Yes, I know you think those things didn't happen or are par for the course.

But look at the two sets of "controversial" items and tell me they are of equal gravity. Let's talk about serious concern for the country vs. partisan bullshit.

See, rebutting winger oppo research talking points one at a time is a loser's game. There will always be another one to make us forget the last one didn't amount to anything. They will always be breathlessly trumpeted as if they were the significant story of the age, across newspapers and TV channels even as the right bemoans the fact that the "liberal media" isn't taking the bull by the horns and "getting to the bottom" of it.

We are at the bottom. I no longer believe that you, or your cohorts, have much concern at all for the well being of the country. How can I? You are fixed on any tiny openings for attack that have no bearing whatsoever on anything of significance, while professing profound boredom concerning major, major issues of war and peace, the aggressive movement of the federal government into unregulated domestic spying, congressional oversight of the executive and the relentless, demonstrable, incontrovertible politicization of our government designed to serve, not you or your interests or even anything recognizably "conservative", but simply the consolidation of power.

You can't or won't see any of that and I don't expect to persuade you, but don't expect me to take another thread about another fake outrage seriously.

That's the topic.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #25 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Condi Rice. A strong woman? She's a yes woman for Bush you mean.

Not my idea of a strong woman who thinks for herself.

Did I hear right?

So you're leaving?

Or just coming back with another handle?

Pelosi? A strong woman? She's a strong woman for MoveOn.org and the leftist establishment.

Is this more RandyCat shit? You never told me what he did that bothered you so...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #26 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post


It comes in the context of the Kerry "hates the troops" fake scandal, the Harry Reid "transfered ownership of his house" fake scandal, the Pelosi "demanded a big airplane" fake scandal, the Hillary "southern accent" fake humiliation, and the Edwards "why doesn't he step down" fake concern for his family.

You're right. Democrats never do anything wrong. Every scandal is fake. Even William Jefferson. They are as righteous as Jesus himself. Can you tell us a dem scandal that WAS real, in your opinion?

... and we get accused of some "blind obedience"

and Jim/Gil - I need to send you two a wedding present. You two find it convenient to paint people in a way that makes it easy on your brains. That's OK. I have been plenty critical of both parties, Bush, the neocons, as well as the left wing. There is no difference in where they want to take us in the end. It's about control. Always has been. You are both fighting a fake partisan war that is keeping the populace busy- thinking that the "other side" is all evil while your beloved lib dems are going to save the planet. Both parties have good ideas. I have moved beyond the intellectual laziness of "one side will save us." Pigeonhole me however you want if you like, if it makes it easy on you. It just demonstrates how two-dimensional your partisan thinking is. Neither party, Bush, Peolsi, or any of them, give a damn about common people... only their power and control over your lives and their wallets. Until you see that, your personal control over your future will continue to slip away while you fight "those evil ______."
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #27 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Pelosi? A strong woman? She's a strong woman for MoveOn.org and the leftist establishment.

Is this more RandyCat shit? You never told me what he did that bothered you so...

Since you use them as a stalking horse a lot, would mind explaining what it is that moveon.org is or does or advocates that strikes you as being so scary leftist?

For instance, if you look at the moveon page right now, you'll see that the topics du jour (as they pretty much always are) are:

Getting out of Iraq and preventing any further escalation, a position endorsed by the vast majority of Americans,

Preventing a widening of the war into Iran, which if considered a position of the "far left" only means that the definition of left and right doesn't really mean anything,

And advocating for an independent paper trail as part of the use of electronic voting machines.

That's it.

If that's a far left outfit, I've got bad news for you: America has succumbed to the commies and is a socialist nation.

Given that, wouldn't we have to call moveon.org "centrist"?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #28 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Pelosi? A strong woman? She's a strong woman for MoveOn.org and the leftist establishment.

Is this more RandyCat shit? You never told me what he did that bothered you so...


I knew you weren't really leaving.

Yes she is a strong woman. It's taken a lot of courage to stand up to our joke of a president.

As for the rest he was just some pathetic joker who was banned from AI about 2 years ago.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #29 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Given that, wouldn't we have to call moveon.org "centrist"?

Centrist. adj. :
Another Hillary-ism, not as much about the political center as about central planning, central control, central banking, and further concentration of power in Washington DC.

Just another word game that sells policy better- like "undocumented worker" or "War on Terror"
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #30 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I knew you weren't really leaving.

Yes she is a strong woman. It's taken a lot of courage to stand up to our joke of a president.

As for the rest you'd know all too well.

If you are so damn concerned about RandyCat, ask a mod to check it out. They can tell you.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #31 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

If you are so damn concerned about RandyCat, ask a mod to check it out. They can tell you.


I'm not that concerned at all.

Now can we get back on topic?
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #32 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

You're right. Democrats never do anything wrong. Every scandal is fake. Even William Jefferson. They are as righteous as Jesus himself. Can you tell us a dem scandal that WAS real, in your opinion?

... and we get accused of some "blind obedience"

You are the king of strawmen, I'll give you that. And for those of you that think this term is tossed around casually: the above is virtually a text-book example.

You tell me. Which of the items I listed involved actual wrong-doing? What scandals? We're not even at the level of debating the merits, since these were the thinnest pretexts for political attack.

Maybe if the right hadn't become so addicted to hot air and cheap spin, somebody would have the attention span to get some real dirt on a Democrat, instead of reflexively going for every silly gotcha that Drudge dredges.

For what it's worth, Jefferson appears to be corrupt, and if found so should be punished (severely, in my opinion). But where are his ties to systematic corruption? As in the case of the octopus-like Abramoff shell game? A shell game designed and openly advocated via the "K Street Project"? A shell game that now appears to have a bearing on the Bush admins decisions regarding the firing of US attorneys?

Well? Are you going to put up Pelosi's plane against that and call it a wash?

Get real, take the blinders off and stop being a water-boy for massive, systematic corruption. If the Dems get some real power and figure out a way to abuse it with the breathtaking scope of the current Republican leadership, then we can talk about equivalencies. If we find out that the Democratic Congress is ordering their own findings to be altered to support a priori decisions, if we elect a Democratic president and he or she immediately moves to place completely unqualified political operatives in as many posts as possible (almost guaranteeing that entire agencies will become more or less useless), if a Democratic commander-in-cheif feels that he or she has the right to ignore any laws that don't suit them, snatch up any American they see fit without any process or oversight, or prosecute a war based on trumped up and cherry-picked intel, then certainly we can talk about how they all do it.

Until then, guess what? Sometimes the party in power goes berserk, and acts like there will never be a reckoning. And the party out of power has no structural way to match that, even if they were so inclined. And you get lopsided corruption and abuse of power. Deal with it.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #33 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

I'm not that concerned at all.

Well then quit with the "randycat" crap. Your paranoia is growing tiresome. A mod can tell you if our IPs are even close.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #34 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Cent•rist. adj. :
Another Hillary-ism, not as much about the political center as about central planning, central control, central banking, and further concentration of power in Washington DC.

Just another word game that sells policy better- like "undocumented worker" or "War on Terror"

Back on topic.

I repeat. " It's clear where your loyalties are ".
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #35 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

if a Democratic commander-in-cheif feels that he or she has the right to ignore any laws that don't suit them, snatch up any American they see fit without any process or oversight, or prosecute a war based on trumped up and cherry-picked intel, then certainly we can talk about how they all do it.

1. Clinton ignore plenty of laws. As did Bush I. As did Carter. As did Nixon. As they will forever.
2. Roosevelt- Japanese interment camps- no process or oversight
3. Bush fucked up, should have never gone to war, and misused intel. See #1.

If you are not angry, you are not paying attention. It's all the same. Since the Wilson administration.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #36 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

Back on topic.

I repeat. " It's clear where your loyalties are ".

I repeat. "It's clear intellectual laziness and 2D thinking."
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #37 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

1. Clinton ignore plenty of laws. As did Bush I. As did Carter. As did Nixon. As they will forever.
2. Roosevelt- Japanese interment camps- no process or oversight
3. Bush fucked up, should have never gone to war, and misused intel. See #1.

If you are not angry, you are not paying attention. It's all the same. Since the Wilson administration.


It's not the same at all. Bush is the worst president in my lifetime for reasons that have been gone over in triplicate on this board.

At least Nixon was intelligent and he's second on my list.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #38 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I repeat. "It's clear intellectual laziness and 2D thinking.™"


No. I'd say it's nail on the head thinking.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #39 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmac View Post

No. I'd say it's nail on the head thinking.

OK. Go on believing. Ignorance is bliss. Moving on...
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #40 of 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

OK. Go on believing. Ignorance is bliss. Moving on...

I will. And so will others. Moving on......

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/....ap/index.html
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Pelosi May Have Committed A Felony