Speaker Hastert’s Letter to Nancy Pelosi

Must quote the Pirate’s Cove! Shocking stuff. A shiny pirate thong for all who do.

You may be aware of the letter that Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert released, supposedly as sent to Nancy Pelosi. However, I have gotten a hold of the individual copy that was hand delivered to her, which differs just a bit.

To: The Honorable Nancy Pelosi

H-204, The Capitol

Washington, DC 20515

Dear Leader Pelosi:

Thank you for your letter of April 12. I too am troubled that the Democratic Leadership hasn’t gotten their shit together.

I am especially troubled that this impasse has been attributed to the adoption by the House of some minor but important changes to the rules which provide all members with basic fairness: the right to counsel of your own choosing; the right to know when you have been charged by the Committee with wrongdoing before you are found guilty and read about it in the newspaper; and the right to a presumption of innocence. These common sense reforms, which the minority made no attempt to change or eliminate in the motion to recommit during the adoption of the rules, have sadly been twisted and distorted and used as political fodder. You know, that who Constitutional stuff. You remember that, don’t you? Probably not, you old witch.

Let me once again explain what we did in the rules changes and what we did not do since there seems to be continued confusion. I’ll try to spell it out in small words.

The requirement that there be bipartisan support, which means the Demorats have to be involved, to authorize the creation of an investigatory subcommittee has not been changed. For the last several Congresses, the rules have required bipartisan support, either through agreement of the Chairman and Ranking Member or at the full Committee level in order to move to the investigative subcommittee phase. That is the way it was under the old rules, and that is the way it is under the new rules. Am I being clear enough, or do I need to buy new batteries for you hearing aide?

Under the old rules, a tie vote in the Committee left the matter in limbo neither moving forward to an investigatory subcommittee nor being dismissed. That means someone is screwed. In this circumstance, the Member subject to the complaint did not know his/her status since there was no official action. The Member could remain in limbo indefinitely; yet as a practical matter, in the court of public opinion, they were "under investigation" because the public knew a complaint had been filed and had heard no other word from the Committee. The new rules do indeed change that limbo status. If there is not a bipartisan vote to go forward, the complaint is dismissed. So that someone will not be screwed.

You mentioned in your letter that half the Committee could dismiss a complaint "solely by stalling for 45 days." I believe you are an idiot with low reading comprehension. Under the committee rules, the minority has access to an extension beyond 45 days. Even more important, whenever the minority chooses to place the matter on the agenda, something the ranking member has an absolute right to do without permission from the majority, the clock stops. Thus an automatic dismissal is not possible unless the minority chooses to let it happen. Are we freaking clear?

What are the other changes the House voted to make to the rules and which you and Mr. Mollahan have proposed to repeal in H.Res. 131? The first was a right to counsel. The right to counsel of one’s own choosing is a fundamental right enjoyed by all Americans, and Members should be able to decide who represents them, subject to the normal conflict of interest rules that lawyers are required to follow. Wow, what a f*cking incredible concept. Counsel for the accused. That pesky Constitution thing again.

The final change dealt with allowing members to know they were under investigation (thus giving them an opportunity to defend themselves) before public notice is given that they were found guilty. It is a fundamental American value to be able to face your accusers and defend yourself, and yet in H. Res. 131 you propose to repeal this right. Sorry, the Constitution again, you old bat.

Each of these changes I just described is reasonable and rational. You could have gotten off your liberal ass and tried to strike them on opening day in your motion to recommit if you found them offensive, but you chose not to. Matter of fact, I do not even remember seeing you there on opening day. You chose to wait till you could accuse someone, ie, Tom Delay, then bone him by not giving him his time in front of the Committee. To the extent that there might be any ambiguity or misunderstanding of these rule changes or their intent, the Chairman of the Committee has offered to the Ranking Member guarantees in writing that go to the heart of the concerns.

Mr. Mollohan’s refusal to acknowledge that these understandings cure his previously stated concerns leads me to fear that we have reached a point where the fairness or the merits of the rules changes seem not to even be the issue. F’ing Moonbat. We’ll fix his wagon soon enough.

I believe that the ethics process should be above partisan politics. Since sincere and repeated offers to address the concerns raised by you and Mr. Mollahan have been rebuffed, I propose that the House return to the ethics rules under which we operated in the last Congress, leaving the unfairness inherent in the old system in place. I do so with the knowledge that once Delay has his time in front of the Committee, as well as you and a few other Demorats, we will put the rules back to where they should be, ie, Constitutional, and it will be too f’ing late for you to do anything. You will be wishing you were allowed council. Mwahahahahaha!

I hope you will support this effort and then urge your members of the Ethics Committee to organize and begin their work without further objections. Since we are about to bone you and a few others for ethics violations.


J. Dennis Hastert

Speaker of the House

PS: Bite me.

Explosive stuff, eh? Linked to Basil’s Suppertime and the OTB Traffic Jam.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

4 Responses to “Speaker Hastert’s Letter to Nancy Pelosi”

  1. Jay says:

    Want a free Stop The ACLU shirt? C’mon over and see how! It’s fun,and way too easy!

  2. Jay says:

    Great post….long read, well worth it! Very entertaining. Old witch! LOL!

    Wanted to invite you to our live chat tonight! Starts around 8 p.m. EST till whenever! Come on over and meet other bloggers! The link is in my sidebar! Hope to see you!

  3. Ogre says:


  4. If only the GOP congress critters would talk like that to the Demorats.

Pirate's Cove