A good Sunday morning to you and yours. Today is Sunday, November 9, 2025. We stand less than six months away from the late 2020s. Today in history: in 1989, the Berlin wall fell; in 1967, Rolling Stone debuted. Alas, you wouldn’t recognize their product today if their first issue were the basis of your understanding of that publication. It's sort of like what happened to MTV — they forgot it was supposed to be about the music. I suppose we can’t dig up Hunter S. Thompson anymore. Birthdays today include former VP Spiro Agnew, author Carl Sagan, and poet Anne Sexton.
Nancy Pelosi is leaving. And all through her announcement to that effect, she looked completely surprised. Oh, wait, with all those face lifts she does that anyway.
I won't hide from you the fact that I find Nancy Pelosi a disgusting and corrupt human being. With her immanent departure, perhaps it’s time for a refresher on why I feel that way. Keep in mind that these points do not even scratch the surface of her vile history.
Nancy Pelosi, for example, called for Trump’s cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment. Matt Margolis wrote about it here almost five years ago:
In 2018, Nancy Pelosi told reporters she didn’t know why there weren’t “uprisings” over the issue of family separations at the southern border.
“I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be when people realize that this is a policy that they defend,” Pelosi said during a press conference. “It’s a horrible thing, and I don’t see any prospect for legislation here.”
Matt was nice enough to give us the video evidence on this one:
Matt went on from there:
So, here we have Nancy Pelosi, then the minority leader in the House of Representatives, now the speaker of the House, at the very least condoning, if not actually calling for a violent insurrection against the government in response to a policy—a policy that actually began under the Obama-Biden administration.
Not even Snopes could deny this one. Two former Obama administration officials have publicly acknowledged this fact. There is a lot of photographic evidence of migrant detention facilities during the Obama years, with children crowded in caged areas, sleeping on concrete floors, that just didn’t resonate with the media or the political Left until after Trump became president. It’s almost as though they were trying to protect Obama’s legacy.
I must say that Matt has a talent for understatement. He goes on to suggest Pelosi wasn’t the only one trying to incite violence, since it was at the time — and remains — a very large part of the activism of the left. But that she played this card and then falsely claimed that Donald Trump was responsible for the violence we saw on January 6 tells me all I need to know about her. That reminder of what she is is even more potent when you consider that the policy she was screaming so loudly about was, in fact, an Obama policy that Trump put a stop to.
The now defunct Liberty Loft reported the following at about the same time as Matt’s piece:
Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo) opened the session in prayer. Cleaver was a United Methodist Pastor and the prayer did not deviate far from normal until he was near the end of his prayer.
Cleaver said he was praying to the monotheistic God, Brahma the Hindu god, and God known by many different names by many different faiths. It’s a significant departure for a nation that was founded on Judeo-Christian faith. But that’s not all.
To conclude his prayer, Cleaver apparently thought he was going to pray gender-neutral and said the words Amen and a woman. You can see his comments below and the Washington Examiner does a great job sharing that the word amen is not a reference to masculinity, but rather a word that translates “so be it.”
Now tell me: How does a purported Doctor of Divinity not understand the plain Latin meaning of the word “amen”? Does Cleaver believe that the word amen refers to a singular human male, to wit, Aman, or to all men, to wit, Man? And then tell me why Pelosi, the person who arranged for this guy to open the session, continues to foist herself as a “faithful Catholic.”
To that point, we’ll turn back the clock a bit further to 2020, via Watts Up With That:
Thursday on MSNBC’s “The Reidout,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) attributed the wildfires plaguing her state and hurricanes that have batter the Gulf Coast to so-called climate change.
According to Pelosi, the natural disasters were a sign that “Mother Earth is angry.”
Clearly there’s some theological confusion on her part, at the very least. Or perhaps she’s simply spouting whatever she thinks the unique folks in her district will find acceptable.
I suspect most of us recall her deal during Covid-19, but let’s include this, from Beth Baumann at Townhall:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) decided to chime in on President Donald Trump’s decision to take Hydroxychloroquine, which has been said to be a potential treatment for the Wuhan coronavirus.
“As far as the president is concerned, he’s our president and I’d rather he not be taking something that has not been approved by the scientists, especially in his age group and in his, shall we say, weight group, morbidly obese,” the speaker said. “So, I think it’s not a good idea.”
According to President Trump’s physician, Dr. Sean Conley, “the president is in very good health and has remained symptom-free. He receives regular COVID-19 testing, all negative to date.” After discussing the pros and cons of Trump taking Hydroxychloroquine, the two decided “the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relative risks,” Conley said in a memo in a memo on Monday.
Pelosi, who has long been rumored to be in the pocket of, and certainly an investor in, Big Pharma, presumes to give medical advice? Jon Hall at American Thinker looks at this and comes to the same concern:
I haven’t been able to ascertain whether HCQ is manufactured in the U.S., but I do read that India “manufactures 70% of the world’s supply” of HCQ. Perhaps the concerns of Texas State Senator Hall (no relation) about “collusion” are valid. Perhaps Big Pharma is seeking a ban on the off-label use of a drug that is so dirt cheap that they can’t make any money making it.
So does Matt Margolis:
Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA for over 60 years, and treats multiple ailments including malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, and is being investigated for other potential uses.
The media has desperately tried to undercut Trump’s positive message about hydroxychloroquine’s potential as a treatment for the coronavirus, calling it “unproven” and claiming there’s “no proof” that it works, and that certain at-risk people can die from the drug.
With the recent indictment of John Bolton, the link between her activities and the release of Bolton's book seems an appropriate point to mention. I asked back in February of 2020 abut why Pelosi delayed the articles of impeachment against Donald Trump. You'll recall that the case against Trump was, to say the least, both weak and rushed. I suggested at the time that she was likely hoping for the book to be included in the basis for impeachment. So, the question I was asking was this: When did she become aware the book was coming, and who told her? I would be very interested indeed in seeing some questions on these points during the investigation phase of Bolton's trial. Remember that at the time it was not general knowledge what was even in Bolton's then-unfinished work.
Finally, on the subject of impeaching Trump, let's look back at Tyler O'Neil here at PJM:
Last Friday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finally caved after weeks of an impeachment stand-off with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The timing suggested articles of impeachment — passed on December 18 — might formally arrive in the Senate by Monday or Tuesday of this week, sparking a trial that would tie up at least three Democratic candidates for president and perhaps prevent the debate scheduled for Tuesday, January 14. Yet Pelosi has delayed yet again.
In a closed-door meeting on Tuesday morning, Pelosi announced a schedule to vote on impeachment managers Wednesday, giving Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) a brief reprieve before a Senate trial that will keep them from campaigning on the ground in the final weeks before the Iowa caucuses.
Tyler pointed out at the time:
Pelosi’s stall tactic has caused no little head-scratching among the chattering classes. She and her fellow Democrats characterized Trump as an imminent threat to the 2020 election, rushing impeachment as fast as possible. Indeed, when the White House raised a routine executive privilege defense to some congressional subpoenas, House Democrats decided not to wait and challenge the matter in court but rather to add another article of impeachment for “obstruction of Congress.” Yet after this rush, Pelosi inexplicably held back the articles from the Senate.
The kind of delays Tyler reminds us of are, by their very definition, an abuse of power, to say nothing of being unconstitutional. Forgive me, but I don’t recall ever being told that in an impeachment process there was supposed to be a negotiation between the houses of Congress. The Constitution clearly lays out that the Senate has the sole impeachment power. This means, of course, that Nancy Pelosi and her wandering band of Stalinist hacks have nothing to say about it. See Article I, Section 3, where it says: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments.”
It was during this period that Pelosi was trying, on the one hand, to convince us that Trump could be investigated because nobody is above the law, and that, on the other hand, Biden could not be investigated because was running for president at the time.
Finally, and most importantly, remember that Nancy Pelosi didn’t want anything to do with impeachment until Donald Trump started making moves toward investigating corruption by Democrats in Ukraine — Americans including Hunter Biden, John Kerry’s stepson, and Paul Pelosi, the speaker’s own son. Once those investigations began uncovering corruption by one Democrat after another and by elite after elite, Nancy Pelosi went all Mama Bear on us, attempting to divert attention from them.
Finally, let's talk about her financial corruption. According to a Fox News report and a New York Post account, Pelosi earned more than $130 million in stock profits, a return of 16,930% during her time in Congress. Tell me how one does that without inside information. Harry Truman supposedly said, "Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician, and I’ll show you a crook.”
Well, yeah. No kidding. I can't help but wonder what old Harry would have said about Nancy Pelosi.
Help us expose the truth—sign up with promo code POTUS47 for 74% off your VIP membership. This deal ends when the Schumer Shutdown is over, so take advantage now!
Join the conversation as a VIP Member