Pelosi knelt for George Floyd in Congress but refused to read names of US military killed in Afghanistan
By: Christopher Tremoglie (MSN)
What a............well you know.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Several Republican congressmen accused Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of refusing to read the names of the servicemembers killed in Afghanistan during the ISIS-k attack last week. This is the same Pelosi who wore Kente cloth and kneeled for 8 minutes and 46 seconds in the Capitol Visitor Center to honor George Floyd, a criminal who resisted arrest and died in police custody. Pelosi's action — or lack thereof, as this case may be — should be rebuked and condemned.
© Provided by Washington Examiner
"We gaveled in, had a prayer, said the Pledge of Allegiance, took a moment of silence with pretty much all Republican veterans, then asked to be recognized to read names and bring up Afghanistan legislation," said Rep. Brian Mast of Florida. "They did not acknowledge us, and just closed the House down."
"House Democrats just refused to recognize Republican veterans on the House Floor to read the names of our fallen service members in Afghanistan. That's how far our nation has fallen," tweeted Rep. Greg Steube of Florida.
"How badly do Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats want to cover up this Afghanistan debacle? They just blocked Members of Congress from reading the names of the service members who sacrificed their lives in Afghanistan last week. Don't you think our military deserves better?" tweeted Rep. Carlos Gimenez of Florida.
Opinions will vary as to whether Pelosi should have knelt for Floyd or honored him in any way. Critics contend doing so was a publicity stunt, especially because she did no such thing for Tony Timpa, who died under similar circumstances without a vast criminal record. Yet, her refusal even to read the names of soldiers defending our country is an egregious act of disrespect. Pelosi actively chose to honor a criminal yet chose silence when it came to honoring fallen military members. It is disgraceful.
Such criticism does not suggest Pelosi should have honored the military members who died in Afghanistan over Floyd. It is to suggest she could have done both. Yet, she chose not to. This should demonstrate to the entire country Pelosi only cares about people when they can benefit her.
Pelosi believes black lives matter. Someone should tell her that American troops' lives matter just as much, if not more. Republicans in Congress should condemn Pelosi's actions and issue a House resolution condemning Pelosi for blocking the names from being read.
Original Author:Christopher Tremoglie
Original Location:Pelosi knelt for George Floyd in Congress but refused to read names of US military killed in Afghanistan
Tags
Who is online
131 visitors
Well isn't that special.................
Much ado about nothing.
The House was in Pro forma session Jim.
From 'The Republican Cloakroom: Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, Aug. 31, 2021:
Note that McCarthy doesn't say a word about their stunt.
The author of your seed and the GOP Congressmen who are quoted are desperate to push the propoganda that somehow the Chair KNEW what they wanted to do. Unless they can furnish some evidence of that fact, they're just blowing smoke.
Yet even that would be irrelevant since NO speakers need be recognized in Pro forma sessions.
Right wing media is almost invariably dishonest.
Yes and in a later press conference McCarthy claimed that they wanted to be heard to bring a bill to the floor. So they can't even get on the same page when spewing their propoganda.
Morning Jim,
I did some due diligence on this story and could only find 4 references and each one shorter than the next, surprising to say the least. One would think that this would cause a major storm that would wash over top of the wave of several recent faked stories like helicopters and wristwatches.
The political right and right wing media will keep fact checkers up to their necks in work to infinity and beyond.
Pelosi is a pig.
Of course she wouldn't want to recognize the women and men Biden was directly responsible for killing because of his foolish and brainless decisions.
Like Hallux did, I did a search for the details of this story . All I could find was about 15 different links to far right and conspiracy web sites. One of the ones carrying this story is the notoriously deceptive Gateway Pundit.
I would lean toward calling this story total bullshit, or at least that the seed is grossly misrepresenting what happened.
If the only ones carrying a story are right wing sites, including conspiracy sites, it is highly likely it is not an accurate story.
Weird. The SEEDED CONTENT bar when you click on it now gets a "whoops" message and takes you to the MSN home page. You must be correct. I'll ask Perrie to remove this article. Thanks John.
By the way, if you click on the Seeded Content button at the top of the story it takes you to a "page doesnt exist" message. It appears MSN took the article down.
You beat me by 38 seconds LOL
Fixed
Okay it's fixed now and the link will take you to the correct Washington Examiner article.
The CONTENT hasn't changed so how does the seed having a Washington Examiner link make it any less 'grossly misrepresentative of what happened'?
The fucking story is the same. It originally came from the Washington Examiner if you read FFS
"Provided by Washington Examiner"
FFS I HAVE read YOUR comments Jim and when John stated:
YOU replied:
Switching out the link doesn't bloster the veracity of the story Jim.
IT'S THE SAME STORY WRITTEN IN THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER, PICKED UP AND FOR SOME REASON SUBSEQUENTLY DROPPED, BY MSN. THE NEW URL IS THE VERY SAME PLACE THAT MSN PICKED IT UP FROM.
Do I need to type slower? and I only said I'd ask Perrie to remove it was due to the fact the SEEDED CONTENT bar did NOT go to the story but rather to a Whoops page and then to MSN's home page.
There were further developments when I asked SP to delete it he said why not just link it to the Washington Examiner original story. Get it now?
Guess it wasn't whack.
And although Ms. Pelosi wasn't there, it is said her instruction was to do just what they did and nothing more. Here's the video.
"It is said' by WHOM?
BTW, here's the Aug. 31. 2021 link:
I already posted that link to the post you are responding to and when the Speaker is out and appoints a "stand in" that person is to follow procedure to the letter. Allowing conversation from the floor is NOT part of that procedure.
Then you DO recognize that the Republicans were grandstanding.
What's the point of your seed then Jim?
BTW, do you have an answer to my question?
It's news. One of our other members used that either today or yesterday when asked the same thing. And I don't give a damn if the GOP was grandstanding. And I answered your question. It's the procedure. Now please leave this story if it is so grossly appalling to you. Thanks for reading
I watched the C Span video, which you and Sunshine seem to think is some sort of smoking gun of Democratic negligence.
What is it we are supposed to be looking at?
I saw a Democratic congresswoman call for a moment of silence for the 13 and then immediately after that adjourn the meeting.
So what?
Oh I see, you wanted her to let the Republicans give speeches about how bad Biden screwed up.
Oh well, maybe next time.
See 8.3.3
No, John. House Republicans merely wanted to read the 13 names, and this has been clearly reported in multiple articles.
Really? Callously wishing for Biden to screw up again to cause the deaths and injuries of thousands of innocent people isn't something anyone should want.
Put up a link or two to an article that says all the republicans wanted to do is read the 13 names. no far right nut job sites.
Nope, as I said, it's empty rhetoric.
Used what when asked what Jim.
You've made that quite clear.
You seem to have already forgotten what you claimed Jim. Here it is again:
Again, my question is, said by WHOM Jim?
Secondly, since you insist that 'that person is to follow procedure to the letter' not only is all the whining by the GOP kabuki theater for their sycophants, but there obviously need not be any 'instructions' from ANYONE for 'that person is to follow procedure to the letter.'
Nope, I'm enjoying myself. You?
Fiction as fact.
That can't be it John because Jim insists that they have to 'follow procedure to the letter and allowing conversation from the floor is NOT part of that procedure.'
So were the Republicans trying to speak about the evacuation of Afghanistan or were they trying to read the names of the fallen? Your comment doesn't support your seed.
I wasn't there. And BTFW I didn't write the headline. Someone closer to the actual happenings [did.deleted]
Are you aware that the Marines died during Biden's fucked up evacuation? That would be speaking about the evacuation.
[deleted]
Your comment is stuck in the spin cycle.
Yet Jim seems to thin that this quote from C-Span was revelatory:
Seems that Jim is of TWO opinions.
What headline is that Jim. When you stated:
Were you QUOTING someone else? If so where is the link?
If NOT, you should be able to post a link WHO said it.
Or did you merely pull the claim from your nether regions?
You merely rinsed and repeated the seed. You didn't answer the question, which I asked of Jim BTFW.
Since you seem to view any question I ask as complaining, why are YOU complaining Tex?
Well FFS Tex, YOU interjected yourself into this thread by replying to a question I asked Jim. Note that Jim STILL hasn't replied with a cogent answer.
While despirately ignoring the OTHER quote supplied by the seeder that contradicts it.
I understand BOTH of the quotes I read. You?
Next time answer the fucking question.
As a public forum, 'our readers' can see that you interjected yourself into the thread and failed to add anything worthy to the discussion.
Yet your comments still illustrate a lack understanding.
So you beleive that they wanted to read the names of the fallen.
How do you explain the contradictory statement quoted by Jim and the statement of McCarthy who said they wanted to file a bill?
I could not care less whether you beleive me or not.
Nope. Merely rinsing and repeating a quote doesn't answer the question nor does it make your comments more poingant.
No one HAS answered my question.
Your reply to my question has NO effect on it's worthyness Tex.
BTFW, YOU thought it worthy enough to reply to it.
That's what YOUR quote from the article states Tex. Why post it if you don't think that's what they were there for?
Why aren't they important to YOU Tex?
Pretending that you supplied what I asked for is BAD FORM Tex, as is calling me 'sport'.
Your comments imply that it works for you...
Does that apply evenly or just if panties get twisted?
Why do you ask, do you think Tex's panties are twisted?
Nah don't think so Dooley doubt Tex flagged his own comment. If points are going to be assigned because someone is not addressed by their tag I would like to know if that applies across board or does someone have to punk out and flag it for attention. Why do you ask why do I ask?
Well since no points were 'assigned' you shouldn't have any worries.
That is a sad attempt at obfuscation.
More likely that cognitive dissonance is now the norm for neocons.
Panties bunched up?
You'd have to understand it yourself to do that.
Dooley? Who the fuck is that?
Shout out to Sunshine for finding the C-Span link and sharing it.
And to SP for the Washington Examiner link.
Thank you!
During the previous president's two terms, what Pelosi, Schumer, and their Caucasian Komrades wore would have been called virtue signaling and cultural appropriation if Republicans had staged a similar publicity stunt photo op. Gotta love far left hypocrisy!
Right or wrong the Speaker of the House determined the daily itinerary.
"Afghanistan legislation" wasn't on the daily agenda and was according to lonnnngggg standing House rules honored by both parties,
ignored.
Of course they were ignored at the peril of the exercise of Free Speech in this country
by one party trying to fire up their cocoa nutz at the expense of the other party.
Big fucking deal /s
Not being that familiar with political procedure in the USA, is it a matter of protocol that Nancy Pelosi read out loud the name of the servicemen and servicewomen who were killed at the airport gate? How about reading the names of the Afghan family, including the 7 kids, one as young as 2, that were killed by an American revenge drone? Oh, the media won't make a thing about that, I'll bet.
So at the end of the day we know that in spite of the headline
Pelosi wasn't even there....
so she could not have refused anything
It appears to be referencing some new GOP legislation a few House Republicans wanted to introduce
on a day the House was not in session, pro forma only.
Not to disappoint or miss a partisan opportunity to take shots at Pelosi, the Dems and Biden
Kevin McCarthy had a press conference to display his outrage that the House had the temerity to follow it's own rules.
cmtsu
So same shit different day. A bogus story...
Boy do I miss John Boehner and even Paul Ryan.