Pelosi Criticizes Truth Commission As Inadequate, "ABSOLUTELY" Advocates Criminal Prosecutions

[kpete]

Wednesday Feb. 25, 2009 14:44 EST
Pelosi criticizes Truth Commission as inadequate, advocates criminal prosecutions

This directly relates to the post I wrote earlier about Mark Benjamin's report that the Senate Judiciary Committee appear to be on the verge of creating a "Truth Commission" to investigate Bush crimes, but this is newsworthy in its own right, and so I wanted to highlight it separately:

In an interview today with Rachel Maddow -- to be broadcast on Maddow's MSNBC show tonight (and transcripts of which I've obtained) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi repeatedly advocated the need for criminal prosecutions, not merely fact-finding. She even directly criticized the proposal by Sen. Pat Leahy for a "Truth Commission," on the ground that such a Commission would improperly immunize lawbreakers and thus foreclose prosecutions:

MADDOW: This is something that liberals have really been pushing. And you have stated your support for John Conyers convening an investigation into potential lawbreaking in the Bush administration.

PELOSI: Absolutely.

MADDOW: You've been outspoken about contempt of Congress charges related to the politicization of the Justice Department and that investigation. You have been less specific about how Congress should proceed on warrantless wiretapping and torture. Why is that? . . .

PELOSI: Senator Leahy has a proposal, a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which is a good idea. What I have some concern about though is it has immunity. And I think that some of the issues involved here, like the services part, politicizing of the Justice Department, and the rest, they have criminal ramifications, and I don't think we should be giving them immunity.

...................

MADDOW: Then in terms of your report, if the inspector general report that comes out this summer suggests that there has been criminal activity at the official level on issues like torture, or wireless wiretapping, or rendition, or any of these other issues...

PELOSI: No one is above the law. I think I have said that.

MADDOW: ... you support a call for a criminal investigation, potential investigation.

PELOSI: Absolutely.

more at:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/25/pelosi/index.html

[aquart]

1. Well, me too.

Gonna get either? Any? When?

[BlueJac]

2. Saddle up, let's get going!

[AndyA]

3. Impeachment was off the table, but now a criminal investigation is absolutely required?

Wonder what brought about Nancy's change of heart? :shrug:

[SammyWinstonJack]

6. Exactly!

[BlooInBloo]

9. Nothing did.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

12. the fact that we won our long term goal: a democratic president

[stevedeshazer]

15. The election.

[PretzelWarrior]

18. MAJORITIES and PRESIDENCY, dunderhead

do you think we might have seen a little bit different campaigning and a little different presidential behavior if they honestly felt an impeachment was breathing down their necks?

I love this because it justifies my patience in Pelosi/Reid. If they go through with this, my estimation of them will rise dramatically.

[bvar22]

27. And if they don't "go through with this?"

My money is on:
Plenty of posturing and pontificating for the TV cameras while quietly sweeping everything under the rug with some kind of toothless "White Wash Commission" that finds no one criminally accountable.

[AtomicKitten]

28. I was shocked when Pelosi mentioned Leahy's plan includes immunity.

What a poser. The penalty for war crimes is not negotiable.

[AtomicKitten]

26. the balance of power changed

[nc4bo]

29. Just watch, they'll be investigating every one else and curiously neglect

or whitewash the top 3 or 4 people responsible for this, with * being #1.

Should I actually trust Pelosi and anything she does or says?

Naw, just can't do it. Too much has gone on under her watchful eyes for too many years.

[SammyWinstonJack]

4. .

:eyes:

[spanone]

5. knr

[T Wolf]

7. Too damn little and too fucking late, MS. Off-the-Table. nt

[LakeSamish706]

8. Kudos to Pelosi if she stays firm on this. I want to see prosecutions of these criminals.. n/t

[Donnachaidh]

10. Okay -- somebody talk me down

Reading this, my cynical mind is screaming that Pelosi (and others) are setting up the public for a long-drawn-out case of *Catch a Pickle*, in order to keep both the commission and possible real investigations up in the air.

Question -- didn't the Holder office just do something to keep those missing emails out of reach? So if they are out of reach, how can prosecutions on some of the issues go forward?

I'm sure there are other items I could probably list, but here is my point --

I (personally) think she's on a campaign to clean up *her* image as the obstructer* of impeachment. I can't think there is ANY sincerity in her sudden revelation about investigations and prosecutions. What better way to clean up her image than to say she's for something, while others shoot down the possibility of either?

[leftstreet]

13. I think you nailed it

I (personally) think she's on a campaign to clean up *her* image as the obstructer* of impeachment. I can't think there is ANY sincerity in her sudden revelation about investigations and prosecutions. What better way to clean up her image than to say she's for something, while others shoot down the possibility of either?

[chill_wind]

11. Agree with Ms Pelosi. I don't think we should be giving them immunity either.

K & R.

[leftchick]

14. fuck you Nancy

you had two fucking years to do YOUR job and did not. FUCK YOU!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

17. she did. she didnt engage in something that would have detracted from us getting a democratic

president

i have always supported her decision in this.

[leftchick]

22. oh, then that makes it all right

:puke:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

30. yes, it does. if she started a partisan war and we lost the presidency

it would be far worse for the country

[leftchick]

31. 90 mph headed for the cliff

vs 40 mph. The old Thelma & Louise theory of suicide. Not much hope there.

[Juche]

16. I'll believe it when I see it

[tom_paine]

24. True, but Nancy has been a little better and less toadying lately.

I agree that only ACTIONS can substantively change my overall negative opinion of her now, so badly has she toadied and bungled up to now.

But she seems to be finding some cojones, and even has taken a couple of hopeful actions (I forget what they are, exactly, but remember taking not of them when they happened two or three weeks ago - the information is out there, though - we are talking legislatively, here).

Anyway, I largely agree with your picture. I need to see more actions, mere words no longer suffice.

[rateyes]

19. She's for prosecutions, but wasn't for impeachment??

:wtf:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

20. i knew at that time that she was right. she didnt want to start a completely partisan war

right before the presidential elections

its different now, we have won. we control the debate much more effectively.

[SalviaBlue]

21. I am thrilled to hear her talking like this.

I was very disappointed that impeachment was off the table; however, this really helps to reassure me that the dems are going to do the right thing in the long run.

Pelosi is NOT the enemy.

edit--oops forgot to spellcheck

[Supersedeas]

23. meanwhile at the Dept of Justice....

[chill_wind]

25. I wonder if they might not be getting ready for some movement?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8219893#top

link edit