House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has repeatedly requested military aircraft to shuttle her and her colleagues and family around the country, according to a new report from a conservative watchdog group. Representatives for Judicial Watch, which obtained e-mails and other documents from a Freedom of Information request, said the correspondence shows Pelosi has abused the system in place to accommodate congressional leaders and treated the Air Force as her "personal airline."
Pelosi's office disputed the claim, pointing to White House policy enacted after the Sept. 11 attacks allowing for the House speaker to travel to his or her congressional district via military aircraft whenever possible for security reasons. Her office said she typically uses the same kind of aircraft used by her predecessor, Dennis Hastert.
But Judicial Watch said that Pelosi was notorious for making special demands for high-end aircraft, lodging last-minute cancellations and racking up additional expenses for the military.
The e-mails showed repeated attempts by Pelosi aides to request aircraft, sometimes aggressively, and by Department of Defense officials to accommodate them. "I think that's above and beyond what other members of Congress are doing and what is expected of our elected officials," said Jenny Small, a researcher with the group.
In one e-mail, aide Kay King complained to the military that they had not made available any aircraft the House speaker wanted for Memorial Day recess. "It is my understanding there are NO G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable ... The Speaker will want to know where the planes are," King wrote.
In another, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King wrote: "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker."
Posted by: Fred ||
03/11/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
03/11/2009 7:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Is she asking for armed aircraft as she crisscrosses middle America? I feel safer knowing that I'm outside her normal flight pattern. Peloski is a maligancy on the House. Lord, hasten the day when she steps down.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
03/11/2009 11:03 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I think she just does this so she can blame her massive carbon footprint on the Air Force.
#8
Well technically shes within her privileges to use the 89th Military Airlift Wing for those purposes, after all that IS its job, namely to transport the civilian leadership of the US. However that doesn't necessarily mean that they are her personal taxi service.
Didn't you see her during that State of the Union? She was happy, smiling, clapping like a cheerleader. I'm trying to erase the image from my mind still.
Posted by: Charles ||
03/11/2009 18:37 Comments ||
Top||
#10
and her ass was spring-loaded. Joe Biden was swearing under his breath trying to keep with her. She was like a hamster on crack
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/11/2009 18:53 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The pompus b*tch thinks she needs to be treated like a queen. You know, surrounded by and served by Roman guards. Nothing like having people of the most powerfull military in the world bowing down to you.
Charles Freeman, the controversial choice to chair the US National Intelligence Council, withdrew from the position on Tuesday, hours after top intelligence officials defended his selection. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair accepted Freeman's decision "with regret," according to a terse statement put out by his office.
Freeman has become the subject of a investigation by the DNI inspector-general.
Freeman, a former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia, had come under fire from several members of Congress for statements criticizing Israel and appearing to side with China against democracy advocates. The legislators, who included members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, also questioned his business associations with the Chinese government and a think tank, the Middle East Policy Council, funded in part by Saudi money. They had requested the investigation, which began last week.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Connecticut) raised these issues when Blair testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on global threats earlier on Tuesday, saying of Freeman, "The concern here is that it suggests that he's more an advocate than an analyst, which is what you and we want in that position."
Blair responded that Freeman would not be one making policy and that the statements attributed to him had "all been out of context."
"Getting strong analytical viewpoints" to sort through served him better than "getting pre-cooked pablum judgments that don't really challenge," Blair said.
In a letter he sent last week to the members of Congress who demanded the investigation, Blair defended Freeman in stronger words. "I am writing to underscore my full support for the appointment of Ambassador Charles Freeman," he told them, though he noted he had asked the inspector-general for a careful review. "Ambassador Freeman has served the United States in difficult, demanding assignments. His focus has been and will continue to be our national interest, not that of the various countries and cultures where he has developed an expertise."
In response, Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Illinois) and Rep. Steve Israel (D-New York) sent another letter to the inspector-general pressing him for strict scrutiny of Freeman's record.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/11/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
If Freeman had a conscience he'd go into a darkened room with a loaded .38 and a bottle of Maker's Mark and atone for what he wrote about Tiananmen Square.
If Obama had a consience...well, never mind.
Posted by: Mike ||
03/11/2009 6:43 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Blair defended Freeman in stronger words. "I am writing to underscore my full support for the appointment of Ambassador Charles Freeman,"
Is this just old fashion senior US Navy, aye aye Sir, three bags full, unquestioning, blind obedience to higher, or could it possibly be time to.....investigate Admiral Blair.
...Hours before the Director of National Intelligence, Dennis Blair, expressed his "regret" at Freeman's withdrawal, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) told Blair he was concerned about "statements that [Freeman]'s made that appear either to be inclined to lean against Israel or too much in favor of China."
In particular, Freeman has described "Israeli violence against Palestinians" as a key barrier to Mideast peace, and referred to violence in Tibet last year - widely seen in the United States as a revolt against Chinese occupation - as a "race riot."
Freeman left no doubt about where he places blame in a written statement after his withdrawal.
"The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East," he wrote.
"The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth."
Freeman's departure echoed moments during last year's presidential campaign when Obama - generally willing to ignore the daily political tempests - abandoned aides and advisers who drew strong, persistent criticism on the question of Israel, which became, in the politics of the presidential campaign, a proxy issue for more general toughness on Islamic terrorism....
Posted by: Mike ||
03/11/2009 08:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It was his view on the Joooos that was his downfall, actually. Here in America we still hew to old-fashioned standards of right and wrong. This is not an approach unique to Judaism, contrary to Mr. Freeman's odd little world-view.
#3
Actually, according to my sources, it had more to do with his money links to both the Saudis and ChiComs.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
03/11/2009 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth."
#5
Hurry, hurry Freeman... outta here NOW. They've got the IG looking into your Soodie and Chicom stuff. Barry, the Hildebeast, Rahm, Geithner, and Kissenger & Associates all insist that you be GONE. It unanimoose, so scram!
#6
Just another example of the woefully inept and completely clueless White House staff.
BO is rapidly becoming as big a laughing stock behind closed doors in WDC as Jimmah was in his "heyday".
There seems to be a "hell bent for election" attempt to put the most politically liberal people possible into key staff positions. Something that does not work.
Particularly in positions pertaining to Intell or National Security, you don't want anyone with political blinders on.
Posted by: James Carville ||
03/11/2009 10:34 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I strongly support the Zionist conspirators in this particular matter.
#8
The White House staff isn't as inept in vetting as they appear. It's more that they are totally out of touch with most of us Americans. To them, there isn't anything controversal about Freeman and the others.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
03/11/2009 11:08 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Freeman is not so odd. Over the years, many who shill for the Saudis fall into three categories.
1. Bought
2. Undue interest in boys (see Lawrence and many others )
3. Both
With the addition of Chinese paymasters to Freeman's resume, it seems # 1 is this fellows problem. What a tool.
WASHINGTON (AFP) -- Freddie Mac, the ailing US mortgage finance giant seized by the government, reported Wednesday a 2008 net loss of 50.1 billion dollars, nearly half of which occurred in the fourth quarter.
Freddie Mac said it had a fourth quarter net loss of 23.9 billion dollars, down slightly from a 25.3-billion-dollar loss in the third quarter.
Losses in the final quarter mainly were driven by writedowns, including on the company's derivative portfolio, and increased credit-related expenses, said the company which was taken over by the government in September to prevent its collapse.
The company said its government-appointed conservator has asked the US Treasury for an additional 30.8 billion dollars in funding as part of its bailout.
They've lost $50 billion! So let's give them some more!
WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama said he agreed to sign an "imperfect" spending bill containing pet projects of congressmen because it is needed to keep the government running smoothly.
Mr. Obama was speaking Wednesday about a $410 billion spending bill --passed by Congress earlier this week -- which has been heavily criticized because of many earmarks. He said not all earmarks are bad. But Mr. Obama also said that such special spending for projects in lawmakers' home districts will have to be justified in the future. Not All Earmarks are Bad?! Translation Only Republican earmarks are Bad.
He said: "I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change."
White House officials in recent weeks have dismissed criticism of the earmarks in the bill, saying the legislation was a remnant of last year and that the president planned to turn his attention to future spending instead of looking backward. Really. Then why is he looking into how Bush executed a number of executive orders?
During his presidential campaign, Mr. Obama promised to force Congress to curb its pork-barrel-spending ways. Yet the bill sent from the Democratic-controlled Congress to the White House on Tuesday contained 7,991 earmarks totaling $5.5 billion, according to calculations by the Republican staff of the House Appropriations Committee.
The 1,132-page bill has an extraordinary reach, wrapping together nine spending bills to fund the annual operating budgets of every Cabinet department except Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs. Among the many earmarks are $485,000 for a boarding school for at-risk native students in western Alaska and $1.2 million for Helen Keller International so the nonprofit can provide eyeglasses to students with poor vision.
Most of the government has been running on a stopgap funding bill set to expire at midnight Wednesday. Refusing to sign the newly completed spending bill would force Congress to pass another bill to keep the lights on come Thursday or else shut down the massive federal government. That is an unlikely possibility for a president who has spent just seven weeks in office. Why? Refusing to sign a bill would be a lot easier than producing gargantuan pieces of legislation that no-one had time to read
The $410 billion bill includes significant increases in food aid for the poor, energy research and other programs. It was supposed to have been completed last fall, but Democrats opted against election-year battles with Republicans and former President George W. Bush.
The measure was a top priority for Democratic leaders, who praised it for numerous increases denied by Bush. It once enjoyed support from Republicans. Oh so it was last years work postponed to this year to shovel more pork into it. Doesn't that make it this years work?
But the bill ran into an unexpected political hailstorm in Congress after Mr. Obama's spending-heavy economic stimulus bill and his 2010 budget plan, which forecast a $1.8 trillion deficit for the current budget year.
The bill's big increases -- among them a 14% boost for a popular program that feeds infants and poor women and a 10% increase for housing vouchers for the poor -- represent a clear win for Democrats who spent most of the past decade battling with Bush over money for domestic programs.
Generous above-inflation increases are spread throughout, including a $2.4 billion, 13% increase for the Agriculture Department and a 10% increase for the money-losing Amtrak passenger rail system. The measure also contains a provision denying lawmakers the automatic cost-of-living pay increase they are due next Jan. 1. I trust the signing was filmed. It would make an interesting ad to juxtapose the many campaign comments to the effect that all earmarks are bad and there won't be any in the new administration. Is there no shame? No principle? No dignity? Sorry I forgot. They are worn out tired old concepts which don't work. Slick Willie II.
Posted by: Omoter Speaking for Boskone7794 ||
03/11/2009 11:33 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the president planned to turn his attention to future spending instead of looking backward.
Of course he won't look backwards, all the destruction and damage he's caused just "Might" make him think,
Can't have that, nosirree
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
03/11/2009 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Whatever happens,he's not at fault cause he inherited it from Bush. (Moonbats Mantra, to be repeated as often as possible)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
03/11/2009 14:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
All earmarks are bad, but some earmarks are worser than others.
#4
WASHINGTON Calling it an "imperfect" bill, President Barack Obama signed a $410 billion spending package Wednesday that includes billions in earmarks like those he promised to curb in last year's campaign. He insisted the bill must signal an "end to the old way of doing business." The massive measure supporting federal agencies through the fall contains nearly 8,000 pet projects, earmarked by sponsors though denounced by critics.
Obama defended earmarks when they're "done right," allowing lawmakers to direct money to worthy projects in their districts. But he said they've been abused, and he promised to work with Congress to curb them.
"I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government," Obama declared. "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change."
In a sign of his discomfort with the bill, Obama signed it in private. He declined to answer a shouted reporter's question about why.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Charles Freeman, the controversial choice to chair the US National Intelligence Council, withdrew from the position on Tuesday, hours after top intelligence officials defended his selection. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair accepted Freeman's decision "with regret," according to a terse statement put out by his office. 
