Daily Kos

Open Letter to Nancy Pelosi: IMPEACH!

Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:36:42 AM PDT

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

We have asked, implored, pleaded, written, called and protested for the Impeachment of Vice President Richard Cheney and President George W. Bush for more than four years.  When you took office as the first woman Speaker of the House, you gave us women, and many men as well, hope that finally justice would be served to those whom have lied to us, taken our country to war under false pretenses, stolen our credibility and destroyed our national security.  Oh, that's not to mention the trillions upon trillions of dollars of tax payers money to pay for a war based and CONTINUED on lies.  LIES.

LIES!!

You see, we KNOW that every single statement George Bush & Dick Cheney uttered in the run-up to war was a lie.  In fact there were 935 false statements in the two-year period leading to the Iraq war.

President Clinton was being impeached for ONE FALSE STATEMENT!  ONE.
About a sexual escapade.  One lie.

How can you sleep at night, Madame Speaker, knowing full well that thousands upon thousands of lives are being destroyed because of these lies?  LIES!

How can you sleep at night, Madame Speaker, knowing full well that hundreds of men are being tortured on a regular basis because of these lies?  LIES!

How can you look at yourself in the mirror and think "Everything is OK...I'm doing a good enough job?"  It's not.  You're not.  Everything is not OK!

This is our country, madame Speaker, we elected you to take charge...YOU have the power to do something about this.  YOU!  DO SOMETHING.  ANYTHING.

Rep. Wexler introduced 190,000 of OUR NAMES on January 15, 2008 advocating the  Impeachment of Vice President Richard Cheney.  It was remarkable, and mostly ignored.  You are ignoring us for LIARS?  What could possibly be your reasons for taking Impeachment of the table?  

Have you seen this study, Madame Speaker, by The Center For Public Integrity? and The Fund For Independence in Journalism?  They have concluded that:

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

LIES.  Nancy.  LIES.  DO SOMETHING!

Best Regards
Kris C.

Tags: Nancy Pelosi, Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, lies, impeachment, impeach (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 85 comments

  •  Good luck reasoning with Nancy and Harry. (8+ / 0-)

    They are far too locked into the status quo to represent OUR interests in Congress.  The now documented lies are pretty damn irritating, though, aren't they??

    "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

    by bobdevo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:39:20 AM PDT

  •  Which ones were under oath...? (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Scoopster

    I think the answer is none...GWB and Cheney are idiots but they did learn from the Clinton administration...never testify under oath to Congress

    You need an underlying "High Crime" to Impeach.

    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

    by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:41:54 AM PDT

    •  That's what the trial is for - (9+ / 0-)

      They haven't even started an investigation / trial yet and you're already saying there isn't any evidence of a "high crime" to impeach?

      Lets call them before the senate and ask the tough questions and get to the bottom of this.

      cheney/bush - if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't be concerned about the trial.

      Why can't we vote online?

      by reasonanyone on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:46:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They have learned...never testify to congress (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        victoria2dc

        That is how you get in trouble...

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:04:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Nancy Pelosi is stopping Conyers (3+ / 0-)

        from doing his job as chairman.  We MUST now stop her.  What are you willing to do?  Will you use your free cell phone minutes to make calls?  Will you write letters to the editors of local papers?  Will you contact friends, family and neighbors about the 935 lies story?  What will you do today to save the Constitution of the United States? I hope you're not willing to wait until Dick and Israel bomb Iran with nukes.  Will you get involved before then?  

        I hope so.

      •  reasonanyone, the hearings (4+ / 0-)

        will take place in the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by John Conyers of Ohio.  

        In order to get them to open hearings, we have a campaign right now. Congressman Wexler of Florida has called for hearings.

        Have you been to http://www.wexlerwantshearings.com and read the site?  Watch the video on the front page.  Wexler and 4 Judiciary Committee members are calling for hearings.  Nancy Pelosi, our Democratic leader in the House is calling for bipartianship.  She wants us to stop being so aggressive with this president and his crimes. She wants bipartisanship so she can solve the economic crisis caused by this administration's lies, crims, wars and official misconduct.

        If you are willing to follow Nancy and be part of the criminal activity of this administration, then please do so. If you want hearings, if you demand answers, then get 50 people to sign the Wexler petition and call the Speaker's office after you understand clearly what is going on.

        Lastly, join the dailykos-ACTION_IMPEACH Yahoo group!  

    •  but I have to wonder why (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      joe shikspack

      they don't testify under oath after all.

      They have no problem lying, and certainly they know by now that the Congressional Democrats won't stop eating out of their hands.

    •  Learn the law, pal. (11+ / 0-)

      1.  Martha Stewart served 14 months for untruthful statements made to Federal officials while NOT UNDER OATH.  Lying to a FEderal official is still a felony, even if not sworn testimony.
      1.  The statements Bush and others made were made to Federal officials, i.e., Congress, and thus are subject to prosecution under the same statutes.
      1.  A felony of lying to a Federal official IS A HIGH CRIME.

      "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex" Dwight D. Eisenhower

      by bobdevo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:54:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course he would claim... (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        victoria2dc

        Executive priveledge or separation of powers doctrine or some other way of delaying, litigating this until he runs the clock out.  There were national security classified issues that we were not aware of that makes those statements not untrue.

        It would be a collosal waste of time and would make the Democrats look like they are on a witch-hunt and would jepordize our election by making independents move away from the Democrats.

        He may be an idiot but he is not stupid and has great attorneys defending him.  Unless we have a recording of him covering up a break-in at the Watergate hotel or a stained blue dress, I believe we are "out of luck".

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:03:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  whatever happened to fighting the good fight? (5+ / 0-)

          It would be a collosal waste of time and would make the Democrats look like they are on a witch-hunt and would jepordize our election by making independents move away from the Democrats.

          Time? They're not doing anything else worth mentioning.

          Make the Democrats look bad? Feh! Don't even start down that path. Whatever the Dems do the noise machine will characterize them as being bad.

          Jeopardize "our election?" - Here's a clue. This is not "our election." It is not an entitlement. Independents want justice and the rule of law too.

          yoo broke the law, now the law breaks you

          by joe shikspack on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:36:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  dvogel001... question for you (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          ikrisarus

          Do you work for the Speaker of the House or for the Vice President's office?  I'd like to know please.

          In case you don't understand, the ONLY conditions under which the administration cannot (I underline and emphasize CANNOT) claim executive privilege is during the process of impeachement.

          That means that impeachment is the ONLY remedy to this criminal administration.  

          Now what is your argument?

          •  No...read my profile... (0+ / 0-)

            I believe in my soul that the Democrats should write off this year in terms of fighting a losing battle with the Bush Crime family and spend all of our limited resources on electing Democrats and Progressives in November.

            It is a zero sum game in my view...people have a limited budget of time and money to spend on politics.  Do we want to spend that time doing this activity or campaigning supporting Democrats for November.  I choose that.  If you want to spend your resources fighting a losing battle to say we fought the good fight and take time a resources away from Democratic candidates at all levels...that is your choice...not mine.

            Impeachment would be an entirely partisan affair and would turn off independents and moderates that we need to support our candidates in November and as we know there are not the votes to support a conviction.  So that would add more ammunition to the Rethugs that the Independents need to vote for them to stop the Democrats.

            Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

            by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:35:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  And actually...come to think of it... (0+ / 0-)

        given the current makeup of the SCOTUS, I do not want to test these issues out there...we may get a really bad precedent that we will have to live with.

        Can't they just do something that is outright a crime, like rape or murder...then we could build a bi-partisan case.

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:06:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Puhleeze ... (7+ / 0-)

      ... "High Crime" is anything Congress agrees is a high crime.  And George and Dick are far from idiots, as they have legalized their war crimes and crimes against humanity in every way possible -- that's why they never do anything without consulting Addington and Hadley (and formerly Libby).  Read any one of the first six Google results for impeachment high crime.

      The lesson from the impeachment of Clinton was that the only thing you need to impeach is enough votes in Congress.  The GOP had that, shat on white bread, and served the US a sandwich it never ordered and didn't want.

      If you believe that the invasion and occupation of the fifth-rate country formerly known as Iraq by the world's only super-power was an act of aggressive war, or if you believe that torture is a crime against humanity, then you should be clamoring for at the very least hearings on articles of impeachment against the men who orchestrated the call to war, ordered the war, and who oversaw and ordered kidnapping and torturing of non-combatants.

      I don't see it any other way:  you either support the US war crimes, or you do not.

      Two war crimes make 'the right', not 'a right'. Defeat the liar John McCain.

      by Yellow Canary on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:16:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That is part of the reason the Rethugs... (0+ / 0-)

        wanted to impeach Bill Clinton even though they knew that he would not be convicted...because it would poison the process forever and make future impeachment procedings look like political witch-hunts which Bill Clinton's impeachment clearly was.

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:22:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, that's way too much credit (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Yellow Canary, joe shikspack

          They just wanted to humiliate the Clintons for the world to see.

          •  The younger ones did... (0+ / 0-)

            The older ones wanted revenge for Nixon and to take impeachment away from the arsenal from Democrats.

            And I might add...it worked

            Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

            by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:41:22 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The impeachment of Clinton was a raw ... (6+ / 0-)

              ... exercise in political power.  The non-impeachment of Bush and Cheney is a raw exercise in pure political power.  The thing they share is Republicans drunk on power.

              It was not thought of as a means of "taking impeachment away from the arsenal of the Democrats", because Republicans and Democrats arm themselves from the same arsenal, and Republicans do not give up any power ever.  The Republicans have in the past and will in the future impeach anyone they want to any time they can.  They believe in using all of their political capital to reach their goals.

              Impeachment is to the Republicans and the American political process what War Crimes (and the sought-after use of American nukes) is to Republicans-in-power and the world political process:  a means of achieving their ends.   Again, Republicans believe that it is irresponsible not to use all of your power to get rich and increase your power.  They make the rules.  They do not follow them.

              Two war crimes make 'the right', not 'a right'. Defeat the liar John McCain.

              by Yellow Canary on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:09:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Anyone who knows the US Constitution (4+ / 0-)

              The older ones wanted revenge for Nixon and to take impeachment away from the arsenal from Democrats.

              And I might add...it worked

              mentions impeachment 6 times.  The Constitution calls for impeachment when it appears that high crimes or misdemeanors have been committed.

              It doesn't give Nancy Pelosi the choice of deciding if it's good for the party, if it's good for the country or if she wants to do it or not.

              It says, "shall impeach."  It means that they must investigate. Congressman Wexler and 3 other members of the Judiciary Committee think there are enough charges to opening hearings NOW! Nancy Pelosi is stopping them from doing their constitutionally charged responsiblitiles.

              So I think you need to do your research dvoel001.  WHen you don't know what you're talking about then you tend to look uninformed or write comments that aren't true or have no meaning.

              Of course you can do that if you want, but that means that you join Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid in having blood on your hands too.  I think it would be a good idea for you to wash your hands and do your research.  

              •  I am sure you are correct... (0+ / 0-)

                But lets look at history...how many times has it really been used for the POTUS and VP, and when it has been used is it a bi-partisan effort or a partisan effort.

                I am not in favor of using impeachment as a partisan tool, in the end, I do not believe it will change a thing except to elect more Rethugs in November.

                I believe using it against Bill Clinton was wrong and for the wrong reasons and using it to make a statement that Bush and Cheney lied to get Congress to fund the war in Iraq (which we already know is true) is wrong.

                Call me whatever names you want on this issue, I just do not think it is wise use of political capital in an election year.  I am looking at the big picture not for scoring some political points with our base.

                I listened to the speeches during the impeachment hearings for Bill Clinton and the RWSM they definitely talked about politicizing the impeachment process as a side benefit so that if the Democrats ever tried to impeach a sitting Rethug president again, it would be more difficult.

                I do not have time to research those quotes...so you will just have to believe or not believe me.

                In the end, it comes down to resources and allocation of scarce resources to priorities...this is not one of mine.

                Feel free to dedicate all of your spare time and dollars to this issue and I hope that none of the candidates you are supporting are not lacking volunteer and/or donations to run an effective campaign against the Rethugs.

                Peace

                Go Democrats!!!!

                Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:47:14 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  and it looks like you are buying into it, no? nt (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          ikrisarus, victoria2dc, HoosierDeb

          what's more important our tripartite form of government and the constitution or elections?

        •  dvogel001... you don't know what (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          ikrisarus

          the hell you're talking about.   What is your intention for reading and commenting on this diary?

      •  Well said YC. (5+ / 0-)

        "The truth shall set you free - but first it'll piss you off." Gloria Steinem

        Iraq Moratorium

        by One Pissed Off Liberal on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:45:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  It is a felony (4+ / 0-)

      to lie to Congress - several were in the state of the union speeches.

    •  Signing Statements (4+ / 0-)

      alone could do the trick.  That's Rogue Executive, doing his part to dismantle the constitution.  IMPEACH.

    •  dvogel001... did you read the front page (0+ / 0-)

      story?  

      Lies, Damned Lies, a Searchable Database of Lies
      by Meteor Blades
      Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:07:23 PM PST

      It appears that we have the evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors.  Dennis Kucinich thinks so because his resolution to impeach Cheney is sitting in the House Judiciary Committee waiting for Conyers to act on it... but Nancy is so busy creating bipartisan smiles and loving Bush that she refuses to take time to consider these lies and determine if they appear to be grounds for impeachment!

      Read on friends...

      From Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith at CPI:

      President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.

      And of course, Harry is too busy doing back room deals to give the Bushies immunity from breaking the law when they spied on us from February 2001.

      I'm furious, are you?  Are you angry enough to take action?  If yes, join dailykos-ACTION_IMPEACH Yahoo group today.

      Let's make some noise.

      •  Nope...but I am mad enough to ... (0+ / 0-)

        donate my time and money to Democratic candidates who will take over both sides of Pensylvannia Avenue (hopefully) in January of 2009.

        You are free to allocate your political time and money in anyway that you choose.

        Peace

        Go Democrats!!!

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:21:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And yes...I did read it (0+ / 0-)

        Old news...we all knew they were liars and that there were many lies that we could go after if we wanted to spend the time and resources.

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:22:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Hi CA voters - please - NEVER vote Nancy again (14+ / 0-)

    I hope a progressive Democrat decides to run against her.  I plan on offering full support to whomever runs against Nancy.  Money, time, phone calls - what ever I can do.

    Blood is on your hands.

    Why can't we vote online?

    by reasonanyone on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:44:02 AM PDT

  •  No way. (5+ / 0-)

    Doncha know the new message is "bipartisanship"?

    We have more important things to do now...like saving the butts of all those insider traders and their ilk.

    God, I miss Paul Wellstone.

    by Naniboujou on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:54:28 AM PDT

  •  25 mil earmark for Mr Pelosi properties (5+ / 0-)

    Nobody wants to upset Bush, our leader and decider, or he might force them to remove their earmark funding. Notice how Bush who wouldn't give squat like children's health care last month, but now chooses to ignore them.
    It's back room deals as we go into free fall. Hard as it is to take, this Congress isn't going to do a damn thing to Bush or anyone else for the remaining term. They are all in the party of greed.

  •  My message to Pelosi and Reid: (9+ / 0-)

    DO YOUR FUCKING JOBS!  ASSHOLES!

    It's really hard to be civil when our Congress is acting like a royal court of fools even though everyone in the world now knows the Emperor (which is exactly what he fucking is now) is totally naked, and ugly looking when naked at that.

  •  My Conspiracy Theory (4+ / 0-)

    Our Congress is secretly under threat from Blackwater's intelligence outfit, which is what you get when you mix rogue intelligence agents and rich born-again Christianist wackos with mercenaries from Eastern Europe and the Pinochet regime.  

    But if I'm wrong (and really, I hope I am), Pelosi and Reid deserve to join Cheney and Bush as official treasonous war criminals in our eyes for their fealty to the King and their immoral enabling of his complete conversion of our Government into his private criminal enterprise.

    •  Well, as Daniel Ellsberg said (5+ / 0-)

      No politician wants to go up against the FBI.

      And if the Sibel Edmonds story has anything to it, the FBI is involved in covering up these huge international crimes that include members of both parties.

      The criminality is so entrenched in our political culture I'm not real optimistic about getting rid of it.  

      •  Not impeaching Cheney&Bush = Cover up (7+ / 0-)

        Pelosi is jeopardizing her long term future by being involved in the cover up of Cheney/Bush crimes.  They've been busy as bees deleting e-mails, destroying documents, etc.  Pelosi et al. are tacitly taking part in this cover up, which is often more damaging to politicians than the actual crimes being covered up.

        They are deliberately not investigating anything.  Waxman is all talk, but he doesn't enforce any subpeonas and just lets them all off the hook.  They all rolled over and played dead when Bush chose another Attorney General, who is turning a blind eye to lady justice, too.

        There are some Democrats, who have been involved in these intrigues, but not nearly as much as the Republicans.  They may be protecting these Dems, but at great expense to their own credibility and careers.  

        Information is the currency of democracy. ~ T.J.

        by CIndyCasella on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:23:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They don't care (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          conchita, ikrisarus

          They think they have it all figured out.    And, they probably do.

          They'll keep this system going just the way it is, and "retire" to nice cushy law-partnerships or lobbying positions.  

          Go on the speaking circuit.   You know, Pelosi "the first woman Speaker of the House".   She'll get Big Bucks for going on the lecture circuit.

          Our society rewards the rich and powerful, no matter how criminal they might be.  

      •  Inky99... it is entrenched, but (0+ / 0-)

        are we going to stop our action campaign and just go lie down, or are we going to fight?  

        I'm waiting to hear from Wexler and see what his next step is.

    •  Pelosi and Reid are criminals... and THEY are our (0+ / 0-)

      leaders. What the hell?  How the hell did this happen? I don't know what to do... other than write and work with Congressman Wexler.

  •  Cheney/Bush have committed impeachable offenses, (5+ / 0-)

    but Congress is listening to the lobbyists for special interests, who want Bush/Cheney to stay where they are to do Iran.  

    They've made up bogus reasons not to impeach, and the corporate owned media (COM) has done an excellent job publicizing their false reasons, just as they brainwashed the American people that Iraq had WMDs and were involved in 9/11.

    Sadly, the American people still haven't learned any lessons from being fooled by the Iraq propaganda to think for themselves and not to believe the mainstream media.  I see people on DailyKos parrotting the anti-impeachment talking points all the time.  A rudimentary Civics course refutes these false talking points against impeaching the most impeachable Prez & V.P. in U.S. History.

    Information is the currency of democracy. ~ T.J.

    by CIndyCasella on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:01:36 AM PDT

  •  SIGN THE WEXLER PETITION! (4+ / 0-)

    And spread the word.

    213,357 signatures and counting.

    Anyone who fails to see the historical parallels between Blackwater & the Nazi SS, or the DHS & the Gestapo, needs a serious reality check.

    by Randgrithr on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:39:57 AM PDT

  •  This diary is great! Brings it all together: (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ikrisarus, victoria2dc, HoosierDeb

    The lies, the complicity, the exploitation of 9/11, the stuff Siebel Edmonds is breaking in England.

    Nancy, Harry: this gorilla you're asking us to ignore is starting to be way too big for this room.

    Anyone who fails to see the historical parallels between Blackwater & the Nazi SS, or the DHS & the Gestapo, needs a serious reality check.

    by Randgrithr on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:47:45 AM PDT

  •  You can leave a message on a Comment Line (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ikrisarus, victoria2dc, Randgrithr

    by calling Speaker Pelosi's office.  If you you don't have free minutes on your cell, you can use any of the following toll-free numbers to contact her:

    877-851-6437
    866-340-9281
    866-338-1015
    800-828-0498
    800-614-2803

    I just left the following message:

    I had initially called your office to inquire when impeachment hearings will start for VP Cheney. I was informed that you still stand against it, however, I could leave my comments for your consideration.  We now have 935 documented lies to the American People and to Congress.  If my interpretation of the Law is correct, and I have no doubt it is, these lies constitute a High Crime. It is time you lived up to your Oath to protect us from domestic enemies and DID YOUR JOB! Start the hearings TODAY!

    I should note the staffer was VERY quick to get me off his line and connected to the Comment Line.  As a matter of fact, he cut me off mid-comment to transfer the call.  I think they're feeling the heat.  


    Call now and turn it up another notch!
    NOW is the time to CRANK IT UP!!!

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    YES WE CAN! *Obama08* YES WE WILL!

    by HoosierDeb on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:08:01 AM PDT

  •  In addition to phone calls, (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    victoria2dc, Randgrithr

    you can find e-mail contact info for all the Congresscritters at the Congressional E-Mail Directory

    AND / OR

    Faxing her (and the rest of the 'Leadership') your demand for immediate action.

    At Free Fax you are allowed to send two faxes per day at no charge.  

    Nancy's Washington fax number is:  202-225-4188

    The other fax numbers can be found here.

    Please use all of these avenues to speak up!

    YES WE CAN! *Obama08* YES WE WILL!

    by HoosierDeb on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:18:48 AM PDT

  •  We gotta' win this battle... (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    ikrisarus

    Something strange is going on... did you read the Nancy story?  Now that she has taken contempt of court charges off the table too, what is next? Maybe Dick will resign and Bush will appoint Nancy as his VP?  LOL!

Permalink | 85 comments