Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

betsuni

(29,245 posts)
49. The OP is about the Supreme Court.
Thu Apr 30, 2026, 02:34 PM
Apr 30

Nancy Pelosi says she wanted to fund service members and veterans but not the war, and for Bush to end the war by 2008, told him she was opposed to nation-building -- Bush vetoed a bill with the goal of ending involvement in Iraq by March 2008.

"The Art of Power":

"While there were major disagreements over what I considered the largest destabilizing mistake in American history in terms of its consequences, I resisted the calls for impeachment. Sen. Bob Graham, in his book 'Intelligence Matters,' had presented a case for impeachment on the basis of Iraq's nonexistent nuclear weapons and our leaving Afghanistan too early. Although I was strongly opposed to the war -- and constantly pointing out the false statements by the administration -- as long as American troops were in combat, I held that we had the responsibility to support them.

"In May, we passed the very specifically named U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act of 2007 on the House floor. The bill was very clear in its support of our military service members and our veterans. Many provisions were directed toward their well-being and their care. Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, chair of the Armed Services Committee, proposed a 3.5 percent pay raise for troops and a $40 per month increase in survivors' benefits.... Rep. Chet Edwards of Texas ... put forward the largest increase to the Veterans Affairs budget in the department's seventy -seven-year history. So it was very clear that our debate was not about whether or not we supported our troops. ... It was about opposing the war"

Obligatory personal insult: "it didn't make as much of an impression on you as it did me. Not surprising I suppose."

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Everything better include expanding the court in 2029. Nt Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #1
Wouldn't impeaching the Repuke grifters help more? buzzycrumbhunger Apr 30 #2
Scalia is dead radical noodle Apr 30 #31
LOL buzzycrumbhunger Apr 30 #37
The Rehnquist 5 started this in 2000 DemocracyForever Apr 30 #45
I hope so. sheshe2 Apr 30 #3
That's why I said 2029 Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #33
I share your fear DemocracyForever Apr 30 #46
expanding court means either party could fill those seats. only works w dem prez and senate. nt msongs Apr 30 #4
Preach sheshe2 Apr 30 #5
That's why I said 2029 Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #32
Constitution gives Congress authority to regulate SCOTUS DemocracyForever Apr 30 #47
Rotate Judges on and off court Whip-poor-will Apr 30 #6
THIS!!! calimary Apr 30 #13
Totally agree with this - the lifetime appointment gives a President too much influence FakeNoose Apr 30 #26
In 2000, Rehnquist 5 appointed chump DemocracyForever Apr 30 #48
That would require a constitutional amendment. Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #34
Where does it say that Whip-poor-will Apr 30 #39
They are nominated, confirmed and sworn in for a specific seat on a specific court Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #40
I haven't been that enthused about Jeffries, but in the past ?8 months or so.... electric_blue68 Apr 30 #7
Jefferies doesn't want to impeach Trump Blue Full Moon Apr 30 #8
link and explain sheshe2 Apr 30 #9
Straight from him. Blue Full Moon Apr 30 #10
cool. sheshe2 Apr 30 #11
"Pelosi won't impeach!!!" we heard again and again, as if it were just up to her. betsuni Apr 30 #16
You are absolutely correct. sheshe2 Apr 30 #38
I don't care that Jeffries doesn't want to Cha Apr 30 #21
Dems can impeach and (attempt) to help people at the same time. Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #35
Yeah, that makes sense, too. I just want Cha Apr 30 #54
This this this this this! sheshe2 Apr 30 #51
Mahalo, she... We Just Need to Win the Cha Apr 30 #55
Yes, we do and I believe that we can. sheshe2 Apr 30 #56
You need 67 votes in the Senate to convict and remove Trump padah513 Apr 30 #24
PREACH IT BROTHER HAKEEM Skittles Apr 30 #12
Thanks, Skittles. sheshe2 Apr 30 #14
Hang in there sheshe2 jfz9580m Apr 30 #19
You too, kiddo. sheshe2 Apr 30 #23
he strikes me as a very intelligent man Skittles Apr 30 #22
I think Alito and Thomas are crooked enough to impeach. ShazamIam Apr 30 #15
Yes. sheshe2 Apr 30 #18
King Charles probably knew Trump would not understand his remarks but knew the audience would, ShazamIam Apr 30 #57
OmGosh.. I've been waiting for some Cha Apr 30 #17
Behind the scenes, sheshe2 Apr 30 #20
G'Night, she.. Mahalo for more of the Cha Apr 30 #25
You and SheShe have made my day. 🥰 MorbidButterflyTat Apr 30 #43
Ohh Mahalo, MorbidButterflyTat ! Cha Apr 30 #53
For warfare to truly be "maximum" impeachment must be on the table. Nt Fiendish Thingy Apr 30 #36
From "Impeachment is off the table" to "Everything is on the table" BWdem4life Apr 30 #27
What was going on with impeachment and the Supreme Court 20 years ago? betsuni Apr 30 #29
Not the SC BWdem4life Apr 30 #30
The OP is about the Supreme Court. betsuni Apr 30 #49
I'm fully aware what the OP is about. BWdem4life Apr 30 #58
They're not going to do anything. BlueTsunami2018 Apr 30 #28
Impeaching SC Justices could be interesting Buckeyeblue Apr 30 #41
Thank you. MorbidButterflyTat Apr 30 #42
You are very welcome! sheshe2 Apr 30 #44
Thank you, Democrats, for being the single mother of American politics -- doing all the governing without help. betsuni Apr 30 #50
Well said and a perfect analogy! sheshe2 Apr 30 #52
MaddowBlog-Trump wants Hakeem Jeffries to be impeached, which is foolish for all sorts of reasons LetMyPeopleVote Monday #59
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»let me be very clear: eve...»Reply #49