Skip Nav
Romantic Comedies
8 New Romances on Netflix in February
Netflix
18 Sex-Filled Films to Stream on Netflix
Nostalgia
375 Reasons Why Being a '90s Girl Rocked Our Jellies Off

Pelosi to Maddow: Criminal Prosecution Must Be On the Table

Speaker Nancy Pelosi has shared some criticism with Rachel Maddow about both the Bush and Obama administrations. According to Salon, Pelosi told Maddow, during an interview to be aired tonight, that she favors criminal prosecutions for the Bush administration and not just a fact-finding truth commission.

Pelosi apparently tells Maddow:

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.

An enthusiastic Rachel Maddow herself shared some highlights from the yet-to-be aired interview with Andrea Mitchell earlier today. Fresh from her meeting with the speaker, and still on the Amtrak train, Rachel said that Nancy expressed concern about Obama's rumored plan to keep 50,000 troops in Iraq after combat troops leave. You can hear Rachel break it down in the above video.

They may be in control of the White House and Congress, but I anticipate some back and forth among the big players in the Democratic Party. As for the keeping criminal prosecution on the the table, I'd like to know what you all think!

Around The Web

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

Join The Conversation
UnDave35 UnDave35 6 years
"Read past the headline, and you will see that the article speaks of the guards getting in their last licks. The guards should be prosecuted for that." Only if this is true. It hasn't been proven, only accusations have been made at this time. As for the idiots at abu graib, they were letting off steam, not following someone's orders. They people who needed to be punished were.
BRANDYNICOLE730 BRANDYNICOLE730 6 years
Read past the headline, and you will see that the article speaks of the guards getting in their last licks. The guards should be prosecuted for that. However, Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration authorized the use of water boarding, and other torture techniques. You can argue that water boarding is not torture, however we have made sure other countries were prosecuted for its use. You can even say that the soldiers who committed these crimes have already been brought to justice (Abu Graib), but the soldiers only take orders from their higher ups. The individuals at the top, who authorized this behavior need to be held accountable.
stephley stephley 6 years
What evidence is there of torture on Obama's watch? The article today talks about nasty guards getting their licks in before prisoners are released, not an administration approved policy of torture. Neither is good but they are different.
StolzeMama StolzeMama 6 years
Argue all you like, your previous comments speak louder than a single one on here.
StolzeMama StolzeMama 6 years
You have a clouded judgment of Both Bush and Obama. Torture is being done on Obama's watch. You believe Bush should be punished heavily and to the fullest extent of the law, but you don't feel the same about Obama. i am sure you will give some excuse about why Obama shouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution, but in reality it all comes down to your clouded judgment. You like Obama, so no prosecution. You don't like Bush- prosecute him.
stephley stephley 6 years
You might want to re-read the article. It doesn't say that. I'm not sure what your first sentence says.
StolzeMama StolzeMama 6 years
What is tiresome is the fact that your clouded judgment of 2 men that have done the same thing will make you feel they expect different outcomes? The new article on here stated that more torture is being done under Obama's watch than Bush's
stephley stephley 6 years
What same things, in reference to what possible crimes, what evidence do you have to offer? The tit-for-tat is tiresome, especially since it requires such logistical gymnastics to make the argument.
StolzeMama StolzeMama 6 years
So are we going to pursue criminal prosecution of Obama since the same things are going on during his administration?
stephley stephley 6 years
Pelosi referred to more than the war in Iraq, the quote in the post even mentions politicizing the Justice Department, and to other administration officials in addition to Bush and Cheney. It is more Congress' job than Obama's to determine if a past administration is to be investigated - it would be easy to question the executive branch investigating itself.
kranky kranky 6 years
My understanding is that Obama is falling right in line with how the Bush Administration conducted the war on terror: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/politics/18policy.html IMO we need to come to terms with how we conduct these things or change how we are doing them. There is not point in prosecuting the former loeaders of our nation if the current leaders are following their footsteps. To that end, I wish Pelosi would just shut up about it and give the Obama administration time to get their bearings and make some policy decisions. At the moment Congress and the Presidency are not simpatico on this matter, and it jsut looks bad.
UnDave35 UnDave35 6 years
I don't have a problem prosecuting if there is proof abuses have taken place by the President and Vice President. Unfortunately, there is no proof, other than partisan rhetoric, and sketchy claims by the enemy, which have been proven to be unreliable (Remember the post on "People who have been tortured can't identify their torturer"?) The fact that those people who were "tortured" were able to identify their assailants casts a large shadow of doubt.
tiabia tiabia 6 years
tiabia tiabia 6 years
I will have to agree with Mich, if you are going to go through the motions of investigating possibly criminal activity, why stop just shy of prosecutions...seems sort of pointless to me :shrug:
CaterpillarGirl CaterpillarGirl 6 years
Lord, after watching those two women, I need to go look at something beautiful and untouched by bitterness and jealousy.
ECULeah ECULeah 6 years
I can't tell if UnDave35 was being funny or not...I want to laugh but not offend.
UnDave35 UnDave35 6 years
And Bush didn't use torture. He used Enhanced interrogation techniques.
stephley stephley 6 years
Interrogation isn't a crime. Using torture is.
stephley stephley 6 years
Interrogation isn't a crime. Using torture is.
hausfrau hausfrau 6 years
Steph I agree that its not a defense, so if you don't want it to happen or are willing to ruin others lives over it, then you shouldn't be doing it yourself, ever. There seems to be some mixed messages from the administration as to whether or not they actually will stop all kinda of interrogation. Mich - Yea, it doesn't seem to make much sense. If you're going to investigate then there should be a punishment or else what was the point?
hausfrau hausfrau 6 years
Steph I agree that its not a defense, so if you don't want it to happen or are willing to ruin others lives over it, then you shouldn't be doing it yourself, ever. There seems to be some mixed messages from the administration as to whether or not they actually will stop all kinda of interrogation.Mich - Yea, it doesn't seem to make much sense. If you're going to investigate then there should be a punishment or else what was the point?
Michelann Michelann 6 years
I really can't understand why we would do an investigation and not consider criminal prosecution.
Michelann Michelann 6 years
I really can't understand why we would do an investigation and <i>not</i> consider criminal prosecution.
zeze zeze 6 years
I think if they did do something criminal then they should be tried like anyone else...in fact their criminal acts are more dangerous than any average Joe's. My main issue of concern is not even the torture, I really would like someone to look deeper into the politicizing the DOJ - I mean if you can't trust the Dept of Justice, what else does this nation stand for?
zeze zeze 6 years
I think if they did do something criminal then they should be tried like anyone else...in fact their criminal acts are more dangerous than any average Joe's.My main issue of concern is not even the torture, I really would like someone to look deeper into the politicizing the DOJ - I mean if you can't trust the Dept of Justice, what else does this nation stand for?
Latest Love
X