Pelosi to the CIA: Bush Briefers Lied to Me (Updated x2)
[Guest post by DRJ]
“House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Bush administration intelligence officials “misled” her by saying they weren’t using waterboarding on terror detainees during a Sept. 2002 briefing — months after they had actually begun waterboarding Abu Zubaydah.
The San Francisco Democrat called on CIA director Leon Panetta to release full details on her briefing — and shook her head in the affirmative when asked if the administration had actually “lied” to her.”
There’s video at the link.
It should be an interesting summer.
— DRJ
UPDATE #1 — Powerline analyzes CIA Director Leon Panetta’s response, which includes this paragraph [emphasis supplied]:
“Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed.” Ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.”
UPDATE #2 — Gateway Pundit says Pelosi now claims she was lied to by the Bush Administration, not the CIA.
— DRJ
Shook her head in the affirmative? I always thought that was nodding, and that shaking one’s head meant “no”.
Or maybe she was shaking her head while saying “yes”?
Steverino (69d941) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:01 pmGee between Obama Biden and Peelousy who is the biggest pathological liar in the first three spots of our government? Let’s waterboard Nancy to get the truth. Yeah, I know she wouldn’t know the truth if it came up an injected itself in her face. But, as Don Imus is wont to say, waterboarding your enemy is fun and it works.
eaglewingz08 (e40a12) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:03 pmThe fix is in.
She took days to take this path. She’s got Leon P. over there at CIA keeping all the dust bunnies under the bed. They got all their ducks in a line before making this play. Something will surface shortly from the CIA supporting her claim.
Shipwreckedcrew (7f73f0) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:04 pmWhy would they have lied to her about this, after going through all of the process they did to authorize it? -t makes no sense. I have a feeling that we will see another leak with a more detailed account of the briefing. Bush lied is becoming the Leftist slogan for everything.
JD (99d9b9) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:16 pmFix in or not, Panetta will have zero control over future leaks on this issue – meaning that she’ll be toast when the inevitable other shoe drops.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:21 pmIt’s possible this is really how she remembers it. It’s easy to unintentionally convince yourself of an alternate history by repeating events in your head according to how you wish it went instead of how it did go.
tim maguire (4a98f0) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:29 pm“Bush lied is becoming the Leftist slogan for everything.”
It has been like that for the last 6 years.
Mr. Pink (62a553) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:31 pmThe big question mark is:
AD - RtR/OS! (791d82) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:41 pmWhich Sunday Talking-Head show will be interviewing
Speaker Hoyer?
Whe is dumber than I thought.
corwin (b11fda) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:47 pm“Bush lied” is not a slogan, it’s a factual account, all through his illegal, anti-democratic placement as p…resident of the WH. He’s a war profiteering liar. Time to wake up:
blubonnet (ae1d2a) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:50 pmhttp://warisaracket.com
What shoes will Nancy wear to her Frog March?
Perfect Sense (0922fa) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:51 pmSanFranNan is a liar. That Rockefeller memo about the politicization of national security should have gotten more coverage than it did.
blu is nothing, if not consistent.
JD (d48a30) — 5/14/2009 @ 1:53 pmNo, blubonnet, your claims are utter fantasies. Stick to the 9/11 Truther stuff, it actually makes you appear more rational …
SPQR (72771e) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:05 pmLet’s see how long until BlueBonnet expectorates the following memes on cue:
– Bush Lied, People Died!
– Cheney as Dark Lord of the Underworld
– Rovian mind – control!
– Blood for Oil!
And finally:
– FIRE DOESN’T MELT STEEL!
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:13 pmRock breaks Scissors,
Scissors cuts paper,
Paper covers Rock.
and I’m the Queen of the May!
AD - RtR/OS! (791d82) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:14 pmSteverino – I’ve always thought that about nodding and shaking, but lately I’ve run into the use of shaking-the-head-yes in several books. Seems dumb to me.
This whole thing seems surreal. The crazy whacked out spending – the takeover of major industries and banks – the government firing CEOs and appointing boards of directors – the Speaker of the House actually daring the CIA to produce briefing notes, putting her own head into the noose… Good grief! What will we do for fiction after all this???? All the stuff that I thought was too crazy to be believable is coming true!
Gesundheit (9ca635) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:15 pmCARLYLE GROUP !!!!!!!
JD (d48a30) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:16 pmHALLIBURTON !!!!!!!!
9/11 TWOOFER !!!!!!!!
Someone tell me that we’ll soon discover there is a secret anti-terror squad that’s been assassinating leading terrorists. I’d like for Vince Flynn’s fiction to be real.
Hugo Chavez being elected president of the United States, as it seems like he has been, is more like a Tom Clancy novel.
Gesundheit (9ca635) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:17 pmMore craziness, from BestoftheWeb:
The new Chrysler-Fiat partnership will get around U.S. restrictions on executive pay by having its top officers deemed Fiat employees,” the Detroit Free Press reports.”
AD - RtR/OS! (791d82) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:25 pm[…] Discussed Red State: (Cartoon) – Honor, Pelosi style Patterico’s Pontifications: Pelosi to the CIA: Bush Briefers Lied to […]
Which Will Be Bigger — SMACKDOWN: Obama vs ACLU – or – SMACKDOWN TWO: Pelosi vs CIA? « Quick Daily Hits (Politics and Such) (962ecf) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:35 pmYou do have to admire Dick Cheney, though. He goes on the Sunday talks, says a few words and by Thursday, the Speaker of the House of Representatives is babbling like Billy Bibbitt.
He is a genius. And Pelosi is toast.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:48 pmIt is interesting to note that Barcky, after releasing the memos that he used to support his oh so principled position on waterboarding, is refusing to release the memos that detail the results of said waterboarding, the ones that Cheney requested be declassified.
Pelosi will not be toast from this, Ag80. I could be wrong. It will go the way of the Rockefeller memo on how to politicize national security.
JD (d48a30) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:51 pmWhat is really going to be fascinating is whether Steny Hoyer is going to be able to peel away enough Dems to break the lock on the Speakership that the Calif. Dem. House members give to Pelosi.
Murtha was a big “Ace in the Hole” for her in fighting off Hoyer. But, with Murtha looking like the Duke Cunningham of the Dem Party, will the East Coast, Rust Belt, and So. Dems give the Speakership to Hoyer who is much better liked in the caucus. John Dingel may be the guy laughing the loudest in the days ahead. His supporters on one of the Energy and Commerce subcommittees are already causing huge headaches for Pelosi’s key supporter, Henry Waxman. If Pelosi goes down, so does Waxman.
How long before the Dem. caucus wakes up and asks itslef, “Do we really want San Francisco and Santa Monica Democrats running the party?”
Shipwreckedcrew (7f73f0) — 5/14/2009 @ 2:59 pmpass the popcorn please……
redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:03 pmPelosi ought to resign as speaker. Why do politicians think (especially these days) that they can just say ‘I didn’t do that’ and people are going to believe them? She is SUCH an idiot…
JEA (84b7e6) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:04 pmJD:
You may be right, but something is going on here.
Pelosi looked like a deer in the headlights this morning. She didn’t make sense and the press is smelling blood.
Also, the CIA is more of a Democratic Party political apparatus rather than a spy agency, so someone on the left is gunning for her (Hoyer?.
Again, she may survive, but it’s going to take a lot of distractions. She didn’t get into her current position by looks alone, so she has that going for her.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:08 pmAlso, the CIA is more of a Democratic Party political apparatus rather than a spy agency
IS it? I remember the Dems calling it a Republican Party political apparatus? Isn’t it possible these guys are just doing their job and the pols are politicizing t?
JEA (84b7e6) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:14 pmMaybe this is too cynical of me, but I’m thinking there’s an even bigger scandal that might come Pelosi’s way…and she’s been told to fall on her sword before it breaks. So she makes a big deal out of this issue, and resigns when she’s proven wrong. Then the issue never sees the light of day.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:17 pmThe full 11 min. clip posted at HotAir gives a more complete picture of how bumbling Granny McRictusbotoxface looked at this press conference. She had to got back to ger script to make sure she got the word parsing exactly correct – she was informed, not briefed that waterboarding was actually occurring because her aide attended the February briefing and she got the information second hand. She attempts to distract with the old chestnut that Bush misled us about WMD, but that the Truth Commissions on that issue did not reach those conclusions somehow escapes her.
Keep digging Nancy. You’re starting to sound like Lovey.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:34 pmLink for the HotAir clip:
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/14/video-pelosi-goes-nuclear-on-the-cia-over-torture-as-cheneys-memo-request-is-denied/
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:35 pmThe Speaker of the House did not attend herself? Countdown until she throws this aide under the back of the bus …
JD (e5f48b) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:40 pmJEA:
I appreciate what you’re saying, and there may be some truth to it.
However, the CIA is the same as every other entrenched bureaucracy in Washington. It’s run by Democrats for Democrats, the same as State, Treasury, Justice, etc., except for, maybe, the Pentagon.
Look at the leaks that poured out of the CIA during the Bush administration. That didn’t happen because the CIA careerists loved him or his father, their old boss.
The question is, which Democrat are the careerists in the thrall of? I suspect that, right now, that person is the President. And his strongest ally in the House is Hoyer, not Pelosi.
But, there’s one thing that the CIA values over any political consideration and that’s covering its butt. And, that’s why I agree with you to an extent. They will not allow Pelosi to call them liars or to align them with the Bush administration.
Again, Cheney knew what he was doing. And, although I suspect most of the masters at the CIA hate Cheney, they respect his skills and they can see which way this political ball is going to bounce.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 3:48 pmI predict this will all get brushed aside. Cap & trade, national healthcare, and the 3.5 trillion dollar budget will overtake this. I have already seen where the MSM is calling this more of a “process” story, rather than a demonstration of the abject dishonesty the Dems were engaged in politicizing national security to score points with the MSM and its base (redundant, I know).
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 4:14 pmMs. Pelosi is too stupid to remember what she said. That is the problem with lying – you have to remember what you said.
tomw (d7324e) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:02 pmShe may look like a witless boob, but she’ll likely stay as speaker. The other D’s won’t try to take her down. Pitiful governance, if that.
tom walsh
Reid/Pelosi/Biden … boy there is a brain trust of Democrats hanging around the Capitol building …
SPQR (72771e) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:13 pmIf one has been honest and straightforward, there really isn’t any reason to double down and try to convince people. The truth will out. When I watched the video, I was struck by the patriotic overkill of multiple flags behind Pelosi as much as her disjointed attempts to persuade reporters that the CIA lied to her.
I’m loving Cheney: he opens his mouth and the left is in an immediate twist. MoDo still can’t quit him. Funny how much power he wields even out of office. I suspect he gets some sort of smirky satisfaction knowing their buttons are that easily pushed. (this doesn’t negate the soundness of his words).
Dana (4a6e8c) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:42 pmNancy, Big Daddy, Lies & Mendacity…
Heh.
Dana (4a6e8c) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:45 pmShe lied about what she knew? That’s terrible. But isn’t that beause she was lied to first by the Bush people? When people lie to you and you repeat what you were told, does that count as a lie? Yes.
The Emperor (1b037c) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:46 pmShe was too busy fighting a war in Iraq at the time.
PTSD is her next defense.
Techie (9c008e) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:51 pmExcept for the fact that she offers nothing to suggest she was lied to, lovie, other than her 8th version of what she knew and when she knew it.
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:52 pmBUSH MADE ME LIE REPEATEDLY !!!!!!
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 5:58 pmSteney Hoyer has declined to join Pelosi in her race to the bottom. He was asked today on the House floor if he agreed that the CIA lied and he declined to do so. She is alone.
Mike K (2cf494) — 5/14/2009 @ 6:01 pmWhen will the Democrats stop milking the Bushco cow?
Its over Nancy, its over
EricPWJohnson (8b4dab) — 5/14/2009 @ 6:28 pmShipwrecked pretty much said what I was going to (only better).
Mitch (57b83d) — 5/14/2009 @ 6:49 pmThere’s more molded plastic on her face than a ’73 Stingray.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 7:18 pmI believe her. After all, the real killers lied to me, too.
OJ Simpson (01f709) — 5/14/2009 @ 7:42 pmi think we need to investigate more.
what if they were Bush boxers instead of briefers?
redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:37 pmI think (and hope) that Ag80 (post #32)nailed it.
The woman is a disgrace. Remember in August when she ordered the lights and cameras turned off when Republicans wanted the House to stay in session to continue the debate on oil prices? And what good does it do to be the party that first breaks through the various glass ceilings in the White House and on Capitol Hill, when the persons elevated to those positions are so contemptible?
Dagwood (8f5730) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:39 pmShe essentially accused the CIA of lying to Congress. Isn’t that a crime? They will not stay silent.
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:46 pmI meant, in the comment above, didn’t she accuse the CIA of a crime?
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:53 pmI can’t link it, because I heard it on the radio today, but she either said that the CIA “always” or “repeatedly” lies to us (congress).
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:57 pmSo, today the Speaker of the House declared war on the CIA.
Hello, governmental crisis!
Techie (9c008e) — 5/14/2009 @ 8:58 pmblubonnet has an open question waiting for her over here. She cannot articulate a theory about what happened on Sept. 11, 2001. Which is sad.
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:00 pmPelosi: the Captain Queeg of American politics…
Bush stole the ice cream too, lady ! I’ve decided to start taking bets on the EXACT day AND time that they haul this blabbering idiot out of the halls of Congress – in a straight jacket…
DaveinPhoenix (9b506a) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:02 pmI watched the press conference when I got home. Bizarre. For some reason, MadCow was encouraged by Pelosi. I do not understand.
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:05 pmI’m loving Cheney: he opens his mouth and the left is in an immediate twist. MoDo still can’t quit him. Funny how much power he wields even out of office. I suspect he gets some sort of smirky satisfaction knowing their buttons are that easily pushed. (this doesn’t negate the soundness of his words).
Cheney is a political student of the late Col John Boyd, who designed the F-15 and F-16 and developed theories of warfare that were put into practice during Desert Storm (the “left hook” strategy is typically credited to his theories). These ideas basically adapt Sun-Tzu’s strategies of attacking opponents only when you have to and where they are weakest, not worrying about your flanks, and pressing ahead to cause havoc, dissension, and confusion. By cycling through the battlefield decision loop faster than your opponent, you end up causing him to become unraveled.
They are the kind of ideas that can be applied to nearly any type of warfare and are devastating to watch when executed correctly. When Obama released the torture memos, Cheney got inside the administration’s OODA loop by demanding that ALL of the memos be released. This has culminated in two of the Bush administration’s key adversaries going at each other’s throats, and the longer they hold off on bringing forth all the information for public consumption, the more it damages the administration’s credibility.
You can see how this has affected Cheney’s critics–rather than offer any substantive rebuttals as to why a “transparent” administration would limit the release of further information, the leftist editorial brigade has been reduced to sputtering whines for Cheney to “shut up and go away.”
Someone–whether it be the CIA, Pelosi, or someone else–is going to get throw under the bus as a sacrificial lamb for the administration, and as a token gesture to the media to shut up about this and hopefully let it die out. The problem is that the left has been clamoring for the release of this information for years, and they now find themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to agree with Cheney. He’s still inside their OODA loop for now, so we’ll see how this plays out in the days to come.
Another Chris (a3bb8f) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:20 pmEmperor, whatever said:
She lied about what she knew? That’s terrible. But isn’t that beause she was lied to first by the Bush people? When people lie to you and you repeat what you were told, does that count as a lie? Yes.
Let’s take your premise: She was lied to by the “Bush people.” But, she wasn’t lied to by the “Bush people.”
She was briefed by the CIA, which is not “Bush people.”
You, and I, are involved in what is called “The Great Game.”
We’re peripheral players. We can’t, nor will we ever know, the internal politics driving this conundrum. But we can make guesses.
My guess is that Pelosi isn’t carrying enough water for the President. I would like to believe that she will be hung out to dry.
But, I doubt it (OK, I’m agreeing with JD now). Somehow, Pelosi will come out smelling like a rose. For expediency’s sake, she will drop this hot potato.
And, if you want to know what I’m talking about regarding “The Great Game,” read George MacDonald Fraser.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:23 pmBy MadCow, I am referring to Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, the same one that apparently ignited the most recent Olbergasm meltdown.
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:24 pmIt feels good to agree with me, doesn’t it Ag80 ? 🙂
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:28 pmAnother Chris – On the Cheney memos. The Obama Administration acknowledges they have the ones he’s talking about, but won’t release them. They use a FOIA excuse, which OBAMA can waive if he wanted. They are essentially admitting the memos say what Cheney claims.
Game Set Match
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:30 pmAg80 – I think Lovey is one of those former citizens of the Empire who Flashman liked to roger.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:32 pmAt least she admits to ESL.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:33 pmJD:
Indeed. 🙂
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:34 pmDaley:
Thanks for the post.
I’m not sure how to say this, but you have some politicians who believe in this country.
You have others who believe that their elected positions are jobs to preserve their own advancement — on both sides of the political spectrum.
I think I can sniff out which is which.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:48 pmDaley – They are the most transparent administration EVAH. Nakedly transparent.
I was joking, Ag80. When people find themselves agreeing with me, they should rethink their position 😉
JD (410197) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:52 pm“Nakedly transparent”
JD – In the future, please avoid using that first word anywhere near a post about Pelosi.
I’m begging now!!!!
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:56 pmTheEmperor #38 – your comment bears no relation to any of the facts, nor even the preposterous story that Pelosi is claiming. What the heck is going on in your head?
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:57 pmcarlitos – blubonnet has more than just a few legitimate unanswered questions from those threads. Under DRJ’s commenting rules, shouldn’t she answer those before spamming up the place with a bunch of new Truther links?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:58 pmJD:
No problem. I understand completely.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/14/2009 @ 9:58 pm“What the heck is going on in your head?”
SPQR – Aww man, I thought this was a family blog. You don’t really want to know do you?
I doubt if she can tell you even if she wanted to.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 10:03 pmGreg Sargent at the Plum Line tries to play down the Cheney story by referring to Feingolds comments about the documents yesterday:
“Happy Hour Open Thread: Feingold Says Cheney’s Got Nutin’
* There was another key moment from today’s torture hearings that didn’t get the attention it deserved: Russ Feingold said explicitly that he’d seen the CIA docs that Dick Cheney wants declassified, and claimed they aren’t the bombshell Cheney has been promising:
Feingold didn’t contest Cheney’s claim that the docs will prove that torture extracted important information. He merely said they won’t prove torture was “necessary” or prove that “they were the best way to get information out of detainees.” We’ll have to see the docs ourselves to know precisely what Feingold meant. It’s an important moment.”
Well Greg, nothing like shifting the goal posts. The whole debate was over whether the EIT were effective and Feingold seems to be implying they were according to your spin. Whether or not they were the best way to obtain information or necessary is a whole other can of worms that liberals have decided to open up when they realized they were losing the effectiveness debate and can probably be debated forever.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/14/2009 @ 10:23 pmthe leftist editorial brigade has been reduced to sputtering whines for Cheney to “shut up and go away.”
Or how about the following jewel from today’s Washington Post, per below, which came with the headline As Cheney Seizes Spotlight, Many Republicans Wince.
The headline’s conclusion about people wincing — not to mention the article’s statement of “to the alarm of many people in the Republican Party” — apparently is based on the hand-wringing quotes of merely two sources described as “Republican” and “strategists.” Two sources, btw, that are both anonymous, with one of the two saying “even if [Cheney is] right, he’s the wrong messenger.”
Oh, well. Perhaps all the “alarm” and feelings of having to “wince” actually are just a case of people in the wheezing and ailing newspaper industry projecting their own unhappiness, spawned by nervousness about crumbling job security and the specter of the unemployment line, onto others.
Mark (411533) — 5/14/2009 @ 10:30 pmDick Cheney gets results.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 5/14/2009 @ 11:37 pmDick Cheney gets results. But he is always wrong.
TheQuietMan (9d1bb3) — 5/15/2009 @ 1:41 amPelosi was a power center. She focused the far left in ways that challenge the administration. So her support structure was removed, and she will fall under her own weight.
This is bad in that it represents Obama consolidating power. This is good in that it represents Obama freeing himself from radical left obligations.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 5/15/2009 @ 5:25 amMark, #72…
It’s always amazing to me that the Left thinks anyone from the Bush Administration speaking is a bad thing…unless, of course, it is someone trying to badmouth that administration.
Then it is all cool and edgy and speaking truth to power.
As for embarrassing one’s own party, I keep thinking of the fact that Jimmy Carter can’t shut his yap. But then, anti-Semitism is almost fashionable in some Left of center quarters these days.
Oh well. It’s different, I know.
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:23 amThe headline for this should be something like Botoxed SanFranNan declares war against US intelligence service.
JD (26bc30) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:35 amWhere, outside of California, Manhattan/Long Island and Florida, is it acceptable or even fashionable for someone to walk around looking surprised all the time, at 60 plus? It is not a good look.
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:41 amWhen she looks in the mirror, do you think she is surprised that she looks surprised?
JD (26bc30) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:44 amI only have one word on Nancy Pelosi: palomino!
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:45 amHere is a cheerful thought. Let’s look at the plan for succession if something were to happen to the Prez (God forbid).
1 Joe Biden
2 Nancy Pelosi
3 Robert Byrd
4 Hillary Rodham Clinton
5 Timothy Geithner
I will continue to pray for the safety and health of our dear leader.
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:50 amNow my head hurts, carlitos.
JD (26bc30) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:56 amMark, here’s the line that caught my eye:
But there is a potential political price that his party may pay in having one of the highest officials in an administration repudiated in the last election continue to argue his case long after the voters have rendered their decision.
Funny, but I don’t remember Cheney running in the last election, and McCain ran a bumbling, stumbling clusterf*ck of a campaign that had no coherent message–so who exactly was being repudiated?
Another Chris (2d8013) — 5/15/2009 @ 6:56 amByrd would inevitably fall asleep on his Klan hat during some congressional staffer meeting, so maybe he would be the lesser evil in this instance. And what about Reid?
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:03 amSomewhere in Kenya a village is missing its Idiot.
PCD (02f8c1) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:27 amI had to look that one up, Dmac. Reid isn’t the President Pro Tem of the Senate, he’s “merely” the Senate Majority Leader. Byrd is President Pro Tem.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:31 amThanks for that clarification, Steverino. I wondered why Reid wasn’t on that list – does anyone besides Carlitos know that he isn’t the President Pro Tem?
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:59 amNot sure, Dmac. Just as I’m not sure whether I should be grateful it’s Byrd instead of Reid.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:02 amI don’t know the Senate rules, but Robert “I know some white niggers” Byrd is the president pro tempore, that is, president of the Senate when the VP isn’t in the room. It probably has to do with seniority, because it cycled between Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd for several years, depending on majority status.
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:05 am–Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
What the heck is going on in your head?
Comment by SPQR — 5/14/2009 @ 9:57 pm
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:06 amYou wanna come and look? 🙂
Can anyone here show proof that she lied or that she was not misled? No one, I guess. So why are you in a hurry to pass judgment? Give it time. The truth will always surface. I am prepared to wait till then before passing judgment.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:15 amvia instapundit – Pelosi First Heard of 9/11 Attacks in Late 2003
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:28 am90, The truth surfaced. Will you continue to be a donkey and not admit Pelosi is a liar?
PCD (02f8c1) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:30 amShe’s been outed definitively by the CIA memos – I guess that doesn’t meet the lofty standard of “proof” or “passing judgement.” She has not contradicted anything directly in the memos, since they’re not amenable to any different interpretations. Thus, there is nothing to “wait” for – she’s been caught in an enormous lie, and the more she prevaricates the worse it’s going to be for her in the end. She never should have gone after her fellow Dem colleague (Rep. Harmon), and then further implicated the CIA in the process – and by screeching for a “truth commission” regarding the torture memos, she’s proven to be dumber than anyone previously speculated.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:41 amThe Emperor – your comments continue to bear little resemblance to the reality – in that they mimic Pelosi’s rather well. Proof that she lied? Her own contradictory statements on the matter establish her lies quite well.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:44 amShe said she was “misled” by the CIA. They haven’t done much to disprove the allegation. I will wait till I see the full transcript of the CIA briefings. Innocent till proven guilty. Remember that?
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:56 amThe CIA has may resources and methods when it comes to intelligence gathering & intelligence dissemination. There is no way Pelosi can say what she said about the CIA and survive. I’ll be surprised if there are not new revelations on this that force her to step down within a month.
Stan Switek (9716a0) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:56 amThat would apply to the CIA. Pelosi made the charge that she was misled, it’s up to her to prove her claim.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:59 amThey haven’t done much to disprove the allegation.
Right, only a dated memo that established Pelosi’s presence at a detailed briefing on the war on terror, and the outlines provided regarding interrogation strategies – to which she had not denied being present, because it is a fact. There is no other interpretation for this, which is why she’s not refuting it, only offering further explanations to which no one is substantiating, including those from her own party and the other Dems present at that briefing.
But other than all that, we really don’t know the full extent of the story, do we? Suuurrre.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/15/2009 @ 9:08 amPersonally, I would love to see Pelosi get booted over this – any house-cleaning is good house-cleaning when your House is as dirty as ours is.
Of course, I would’ve loved to see a lot of other people get booted over this, too. But I’ll take what I can get – the woman who lied about ending the war to pick up a Democratic majority (and the Speaker’s post) in 2006 seems a wonderful place to start.
Leviticus (35fbde) — 5/15/2009 @ 9:19 amI will wait till I see the full transcript of the CIA briefings.
In other words, The Emperor sets an impossible evidentiary burden completely irrationally. That’s a good way to avoid having to actually … you know … deal with reality. These kind of contortions to avoid having to accept that your beliefs are simply wrong is the mark of a fanatic.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/15/2009 @ 9:23 amGee. What if someone pays attention to Pelosi’s call yesterday for a Truth Commission? That didn’t get much traction. But I expect it’s the end game. And now it will happen.
Larry Reilly (45e7a4) — 5/15/2009 @ 10:31 amShe’s saying, ‘OK, let’s get everything out on the table and see who knew and did what and when.’
That’s why Newt is screaming ad hominems at the top of his lungs. Pelosi has now pried open the can. Let’s see who has the most to fear/gain/lose from the worms that inevitably will crawl out.
She’s saying, ‘OK, let’s get everything out on the table and see who knew and did what and when.’
So now she’s agreeing with Cheney, too? Awesome.
Another Chris (2d8013) — 5/15/2009 @ 10:46 amAwesome, indeed.
Larry Reilly (45e7a4) — 5/15/2009 @ 10:54 amI expect shock and awesome.
Be careful what you wish for, Larry Reilly. And the worst thing a person could ever do is argue for something for political gain at the risk of the lives of servicemen or servicewomen.
Will it? I can’t say, and neither can you.
But folks from the Left seem utterly convinced that the only information that will be released will damage…surprise…Republicans.
Nancy Pelosi knows better. I think you suspect the same.
In any event, this reminds me of the whole “frogmarching Dick Cheney out of the White House” business. Silly partisan nonsense.
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/15/2009 @ 10:59 amYes, Larry, that’s why she looked so confident at her press conference.
What? She didn’t? She contradicted herself and couldn’t keep her story straight? Imagine that.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:06 amLike this description, SPQR:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/15/curl-speaker-misspeaks/
My father always told me it was simpler to tell the truth. You don’t have to remember to whom you told what…and then have to explain the different versions.
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:11 amMy father always told me it was simpler to tell the truth. You don’t have to remember to whom you told what…and then have to explain the different versions.
Comment by Eric Blair — 5/15/2009 @ 11:11 am
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:27 amDid he also tell you to not rush into judgment about folks?
Hmmm, another “new” name, spewing the same old tripe about the same GOP targets. I’d assume it’s one of the banned trolls that has nothing better to do.,
Just step around it.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R., (10cb85) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:29 amEmperor, since Nancy Pelosi claimed that she was misled, shouldn’t it be up to her to prove it?
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:34 amOh, Emperor, you really don’t want to ask that question. Truly. But then, you are just trying to stir the pot, as you have been doing the past few days.
Instead of that, why not provide some concrete evidence of the honesty and forthrightness of Nancy Pelosi in the past? Really. We’ll wait. You can start with the “…most ethical and honest Congress in history…” pronouncement.
Pelosi is a dishonest partisan hack. Which was my point, and I am guessing you know all that. Unless you are being reflexive.
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:40 amLooks like Panetta did his duty to the President and the Speaker is now dodging Firestones.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:54 amLovie – It should be really easy for you to show how SanFranNan has been honest, or even consistent, on this topic.
There are none that are so blind as those that refuse to see.
JD (116d4d) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:54 am#97, 98 #107. The CIA does not conduct briefing on what they didn’t do. They conduct briefing on what they DID do. They have zero obligation to brief on what they did not do. That is why Pelosi’s story doesn’t wash.
After Pelosi’s performance yesterday at her press conference It was clear that she is a liar. Here career as speaker will be over within a month. Wait and see.
Stan Switek (9716a0) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:57 amAg80 – Now it makes sense why a lifetime politico was appointed to the CIA. I have no doubt that documents will be leaked that show, even more, how dishonest SanFranNan was being.
JD (116d4d) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:58 amThink about it. The Speaker of the House accused the CIA of committing a crime on national television. I cannot imagine that they will take that without responding.
JD (116d4d) — 5/15/2009 @ 11:59 amThink about it JD. Would she make that kind of accusation without real proof? It’s a really bold and suicidal thing to do: going against the CIA like that. Something seems to be brewing somewhere. This promises to be interesting. Popcorn anyone? Why is she so confident about seeing the transcripts?
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:11 pmI don’t know JD, some people don’t believe what they see live on national television either, IYKWIMAITTYD … “Time to Wake UP!”
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:12 pmComment by Steverino — 5/15/2009 @ 11:34 am
I think the burden lies on those who are accusing her of lying. They ought to provide evidence that she is lying. So far all we have are speculations. I don’t build on speculations. I prefer facts. Until we see the transcripts of this briefing, we don’t know who is lying and who is telling the truth.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:18 pmIf she had proof, she would have provided that, no? I certainly would expect more proof than “Let me read that again. Let me read that again”. Given the Dems perfidy on issues of national security, there is no reason to afford her any benefit of the doubt. Her accusation, her burden of proof.
She was just following the Rockefeller script, and falling back on the BUSH LIED! canard.
carlitos – lovie is just being a gentleman, kind of like EfP.
JD (dd7aa0) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:19 pmThe burden of proof in lovie’s world is bizarre.
JD (dd7aa0) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:21 pm#117
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:27 pmDon’t believe everything you see on TV. Didn’t someone tell you that? 🙂
No, Emperor, Pelosi is the one who claimed she was misled by the CIA. In essence, Pelosi cliamed the CIA lied…so, according to you, it’s up to HER to prove that claim.
It’s not up to the CIA to prove that they didn’t mislead her.
I’m glad I swallowed my drink before reading this, else I might have ruined my monitor. So far, all we have is the CIA showing that Pelosi was briefed. Since you prefer facts, chew on that one for a while.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:29 pmEmperor:
Well, she might not be too bright. Actually, I think she is. As a I’ve said before, she didn’t get to be Speaker on looks alone.
I can’t imagine why she’s doing what she’s doing. Maybe she’s been listening to her nutcase constituents instead of the whispers on Washington’s political winds.
Whatever the reason, she’s in deep. A politician, especially one of the top leaders of the party in power, usually can insult any federal agency, including the IRS, without fear of consequences.
The CIA is different, though. Heck, President Bush didn’t even call them liars and the agency careerists still conducted an eight-year leak-and-whisper campaign to discredit him and his administration.
Pelosi may skate, but she’s going to have to call in every political chit she has and it’s unlikely Murtha is going to be much help on this one.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:32 pmI really don’t see how Nancy Pelosi will knowingly fall on the proverbial sword. Would she come out in the open, in a press conference and lie on national television? Knowing the implications it presents to her political career? I think she is smarter than that. Or not. It remains to be seen.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:34 pmThe Emperor, #116, she’s done it before.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:34 pmall we have is the CIA showing that Pelosi was briefed. Since you prefer facts, chew on that one for a while.
Comment by Steverino — 5/15/2009 @ 12:29 pm
Briefed about what?
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/15/2009 @ 12:50 pmWhy doesn’t anyone take nk’s helpful advice to ‘step around’ these obtuse postings?
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 1:25 pmSounds like good advice to me – like trying to argue with a 3rd Grader without the cuteness factor.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/15/2009 @ 2:30 pmBriefed on the interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, in September, 2002.
Chew on that for a little bit.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 2:31 pmThe Emperor, does it really mean something to you to come here and simply pretend ignorance of the issue? Does it mean something to you to then pretend that your ignorance of the issue is itself exculpatory of Pelosi?
SPQR (72771e) — 5/15/2009 @ 2:37 pmEmperor:
Either Pelosi is lying or Panetta is lying. Which one are you going to bet on?
Remember, they’re both liberals and both Democrats. It’s hard to believe, I know, but either one of them is lying or they are both lying. They both can’t be telling the truth.
So much for eight years of hearing how the Dems will restore integrity on Capitol Hill.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 2:53 pmI’ve updated the post with CIA Director Panetta’s response (via Powerline).
DRJ (f55947) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:03 pmHmmm. Thanks for the update DRJ. Panetta seems to imply that he’s not the one lying. Who would that leave, then?
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:07 pmAg8o – So much for eight years of hearing how the Dems will restore integrity on Capitol Hill.
Maybe they’ll help restore integrity – by being so disingenuous that a bunch of the crooks will fail to win re-election.
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:10 pmI’m betting on a full bipolar switch from lovey on this subject….setting the over/under at 10 minutes
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:13 pm“I don’t know JD, some people don’t believe what they see live on national television either, IYKWIMAITTYD … “Time to Wake UP!””
carlitos – Some days I’m just slow. Are you referring to those people who flat out failed to see the bright neon lights proclaiming Obama to be an unqualified, inexperienced, empty suit dirty socialist? Bacause normally a lot of people who voted for him wouldn’t vote for that type of candidate if they knew what they were doing.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:41 pmdaleyrocks,
I think it’s more a reference to 9/11 and how truthers can’t believe their own eyes, even after they watched events happen (blubonnet, for example). But I could be wrong. 🙂
Stashiu3 (460dc1) — 5/15/2009 @ 3:46 pmYeah, it was the truther thing, but it works for a lot of things.
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/15/2009 @ 4:38 pmIt worked for me the way I described it.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/15/2009 @ 5:16 pmI was enjoying Nancy’s “everybody but me is lying” narrative, but she’s already started walking that back in a statement tonight because she thinks we should look forward. Heh!
Now she just blames Bush.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:14 pmEither Pelosi is lying or Panetta is lying. Which one are you going to bet on?
Panetta hung Pelosi out to dry.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (1284e4) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:20 pmThanks for the tip, daley. I’ve updated the post to link Gateway Pundit’s take on Pelosi’s most recent statements.
DRJ (f55947) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:23 pmI’m waiting for those strong statements of support from the White House. The question is who will they support.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:29 pmHey, lovey, I know you’re lurking out there…NOW do we have enough proof that Nancy Pelosi lied????
Steverino (69d941) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:31 pmThe Emperor is conspiculously absent, Steverino.
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (1284e4) — 5/15/2009 @ 7:37 pmNotice just how outraged the Democrats are at the relatively mild attacks made by Cheney ( as compared to those Al Gore made during the Bush administration ).
Not to mention the outrage looks Pelosi makes over the relatively mild leaks from the CIA compared to the ones the Democrats celebrated against the Bush administration.
These people really were so stupid as to believe that the vicious partisan politics they practiced could not be turned around against them – and they squeal like pigs at a fraction of the turnabout.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:07 pm“squeal like pigs”
I say “bray like donkeys.”
Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (1284e4) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:20 pmIt appears that the thought is not original with me as Victor Davis Hanson says it better.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:27 pmI knew Pelosi was smart. She’s now saying the Bush administration lied to her, despite the fact that she quite clearly said on Thursday that it was the CIA.
Now, she’ll be able to deflect any criticism back to the previous administration. The MSM and left will take this as the new meme and her accusations against the CIA will be forgotten.
Except for a few points:
1. People aren’t that stupid.
2. The Bush administration didn’t lie.
3. The CIA doesn’t forget.
4. This is internecine war, not Dem. vs. Rep. war. President Obama wants her gone, for whatever reason.
It’s somewhat akin to Trotsky, except instead of a ice pick to her head, she’ll be offered a Cabinet post or Ambassadorship.
Then, the happy ship of state will sail along.
Again, I may be wrong. But I see forces at work here that we can’t presume to understand.
After all, the whole sorry reason for this episode in the first place was to villainize Bush, but the victim has instead been the Speaker of the House.
Either she’s not as smart as I thought or someone on her side no longer has use for her.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:30 pmSo, Pelosi is now lying about the lies she told yesterday?
JD (298166) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:31 pmAg80, she’s never been as smart as she thinks she is.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:32 pmThis has been the most fascinating, astonishing unfolding political story I have ever seen. I don’t know how it will turn out, but we may look to our southern neighbors to see the result.
Also, has it occurred to anyone else that almost everything that the left promised under Bush has come true under the regime of President Obama?
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 8:38 pmWhat is surreal is watching the gang at MSNBC defending Pelosi, even after she tried to walk away from her prior statements by lying about her prior lying.
JD (298166) — 5/15/2009 @ 9:03 pmJD:
Thanks for watching MSNBC so the rest of us don’t have to.
Ag80 (db38af) — 5/15/2009 @ 9:14 pm“Don’t believe everything you see on TV. Didn’t someone tell you that?”
Comment by The Emperor — 5/15/2009
Absolutely true. Especially when those channels are getting $2 Trillion in shady porkulus money!
Vermont Neighbor (539e49) — 5/16/2009 @ 12:49 amLet’s be fair and balanced here. Nancy Pelosi isn’t lying or covering her tracks. She’s just growing within the demands of the job! It’s a sign of maturity to govern just like Obama governs.
Vermont Neighbor (539e49) — 5/16/2009 @ 12:56 amHere’s the money quote.
Vermont Neighbor (539e49) — 5/16/2009 @ 12:59 amPelosi Statement on Panetta Message to CIA Employees
Washington, D.C. – Speaker Nancy Pelosi issued the following statement today in response to a message today to CIA Employees from Director Leon Panetta:
“We all share great respect for the dedicated men and women of the intelligence community who are deeply committed to the safety and security of the American people. My criticism of the manner in which the Bush Administration did not appropriately inform Congress is separate from my respect for those in the intelligence community who work to keep our country safe. What is important now is to be united in our commitment to ensuring the security of our country; that, and how Congress exercises its oversight responsibilities, will continue to be my focus as we move forward.”
Does this read like she is back-tracking from her earlier comments? Not to me. She is still saying she was lied to. Only difference here is who she is putting the blame on. The Bush Administration.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 7:40 amNow you are just being dishonest. She stated, unequivocably, that the CIA lied to her, and to Congress, and that they do it all the time. One day later? Down the memory hole.
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 7:49 amSo, folks, is lovie just feigning ignorance, or is it truly ignorant? I ask, you decide.
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:01 amJD, Who was the CIA working for, then? Who do they take orders from? Just asking.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:15 amLovey is being deliberately dishonest, JD. We have Pelosi on tape saying the CIA misled her. Now Pelosi is saying “My criticism of the manner in which the Bush Administration did not appropriately inform Congress is separate from my respect for those in the intelligence community who work to keep our country safe. ”
So, one day Pelosi claims the CIA misled her and screamed for a release of the briefing, and the next day, Pelosi has the utmost respect for the intelligence community. I hope her legs don’t get sore from walking both sides of the street like that.
The problem is, the CIA briefed her and other members of Congress on the interrogations.
So, either Lovey can’t read English, or is trying to weasel out. My money’s on weaseling out.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:17 amI step around those postings now. Makes for less stress on the old noggin.
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:35 amComment by Steverino — 5/16/2009 @ 8:17 am
Read my comments on this, Steverino, I have always said don’t jump into conclusions yet. She is still saying folks lied to her. Whether you call it the CIA working under the Bush Admin. or the CIA. Someone lied to her. See my attitude to this. It doesn’t matter either way. I suspect she is being muzzled at this point. I may be wrong.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:38 amTruer words were never written.
You’re full of bullshit, lovey. Go back and read what Pelosi actually said. Stuff like:
And:
So, she has stated that whoever briefed her — and we know that was the CIA — lied to her.
On top of that, we have this exchange:
It’s clear to everyone except lovey that Pelosi categorically claimed the CIA lied to her and to Congress.
Now, Pelosi is saying she has the utmost respect for the CIA, and it was the Bush administration who didn’t inform her “appropriately”.
But we know for a fact that she was briefed on waterboarding and other interrogation techniques. Just how much more “appropriate” information does she need?
Steverino (69d941) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:51 amIt is not jumping to conclusions when Panetta contradicts Pelosi, and Pelosi contradicts Pelosi who was contrdicting Pelosi.
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 8:57 amShorter Pelosi: Either I lied, or I was too stupid to understand what the CIA was telling me.
Shorter Lovey: I don’t care about the facts, I’m going to badger everyone about not jumping to conclusions.
I’m guessing lovey was a juror on the OJ Simpson trial.
Steverino (69d941) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:04 amWell, Leon Panetta is not being muzzled. Funny, that.
Actually, JD put it best.
Emperor, you backed the wrong Palomino. Unless you think the black helicopters are coming.
Pelosi is a partisan hack.
Again, where is her record of honesty and forthrightness? She tired to talk the talk—where it her walking the walk? Where is her record of setting aside political posturing for the good of the country?
And before you reply that all politicians do that, I would remind you that you are the one quick to judge the CIA (which now includes Panetta, who is no neocon) and very, very slow to see Pelosi for who she is.
My guess is that you have never studied Pelosi’s record, and are just doing what Pelosi does daily: being reflexively partisan.
Oh well.
Eric Blair (262ccd) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:18 amYou know what, she lied. She knew that EIT, especially waterboarding, was being carried out on those detainees. Yet she did not raise an objection until now that her party is in power. She lied. She knew about it. She is complicit to torture. She is evil. Happy now?
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:31 amYou should consider saying “I was wrong” with a bit more grace, and less snark. But that’s up to you.
I know that I can be wrong about many things. In politics, things are far less clear than in science.
Is Pelosi “evil”? No. A partisan hack who cares about D versus R above all things? You bet.
And here is the point. Pelosi didn’t want to look like a hypocrite. I’m sure that, in the aftermath of 9/11, many legislators were much less concerned about the rights of terrorists than now. Pelosi could have said that. And I don’t think it would have mattered much.
But no. She wants to look like she is correct no matter what. Blaming the CIA at first, and then shifting that over to GWB. But all the while, her own testimony stunk to high heaven. And in doing all of this, she damaged her own reputation, and that of her party. Everyone sees her as the hypocrite she is—even the White House (see what Panetta had to say).
So once again: it’s easier to tell the truth, from the beginning. Egotism is a dangerous vice among politicians, and other places too. A cautionary tale for all.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:53 amComment by The Emperor — 5/16/2009 @ 9:31 am
“Evil?” Well, let’s consider.
Late to the thread here, but what she did was wrong, not because she was “complicit to torture” (waterboarding is very intense but not torture – you don’t see us pulling fingernails and doing genital shocks on our own troops) but because she knew that waterboarding was going on, and in the context of the terrorist situation at the time, gave her tacit approval.
It’s only now that, for her own political protection with her Democrat allies and constituents, now that the Democratic political winds re: the administration of the war on terror have shifted, that she denied knowing waterboarding was going on.
Yes, she did lie. And she has no problem slandering the entire CIA and the entire Bush administration in order to cover her own political behind. Except of course doing the former, she suddenly remembered yesterday, would have some bad consequences for her, so she backed down on the first slander.
That – her lies, her slanders, her “me first” actions, her hypocrisy re: EIT and her naked political posturing is what makes her evil IMO.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:55 amSorry, Eric, we cross posted. I respectfully disagree re: Pelosi. I think people who have no trouble seriously trashing the reputations of others to cover their own tushes are gravely lacking in virtue- evil is not too strong a word.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 5/16/2009 @ 9:57 amI can see your point, NOYK. I am allergic to that word a bit, since I heard it applied to people on the Right so routinely and unfairly over the past decade or so on campus.
But you are defining the word and not using it emotionally, as an epithet.
Narcissistic sociopathy might well apply to a number of politicians. But then, we have seen a lot of folks flung under the bus recently, have we not?
Eric Blair (57b266) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:01 amLovie – It is far easier to admit that you are/were wrong. You inability to do so follows with what we have come to expect from you.
I wish that GWB and Cheney would now also pushback on Pelosi, show he to be the deceitful partisan hack that she has proven herself to be. I suspect they will not, but it sure would be fun.
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:10 amBy that, I mean that someone should ask her for specifics. As to who lied to her about waterboarding, when, etc … Don’t let her off the hook by defaulting to “Bush lied”.
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:12 amYou are right Eric. She didn’t need to lie, if she lied. I mean, this was 2002. Barely a year after 9/11. No one had problems with whatever the Bush Admin. felt was necessary to stop another 9/11. It would have been political incorrect for to have voiced any opposition at that time. The Dems and eps were united in the war against terror. Nobody was interested in what could be the rights of enemy combatants. This should be her line of argument. If indeed she saw the briefings and knew about waterboarding. But since she says she was not told it was being used at the time, I would give her the benefit of the doubt. At least until evidence points to the contrary. What I see is a desperate attempt by the Reps to use this against her. Reeks of vendetta. They want their pound of flesh.
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:15 amNow Emperor is just being overtly dishonest. SHOCKA
JD (e7c77f) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:20 amBy that, I mean that someone should ask her for specifics. As to who lied to her about waterboarding, when, etc … Don’t let her off the hook by defaulting to “Bush lied”.
Comment by JD — 5/16/2009 @ 10:12 am
I do think it’s a great thing that Pelosi’s lies and floundering around for her “Bush Lied”(tm) life preserver are getting so much publicity. Maybe Joe and Jane Sixpack will start seeing that oft-repeated slander for what it really is.
Who’s going to ask the question though, is the question. Cheney? Hannity? Tapper? BTW loved Sir Gibbs the Valiant punting the Pelosi question –and in-the-foreground Tapper’s slightly disgusted expression– at the WH presser yesterday. (Gibbs: “I know you’re trying to get me involved but I won’t RSVP”) Why doesn’t he just tell them again to “call the White House.” What a weasel.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:24 amOf all the funniest, most wingnuttiest, most divorced from reality statements ever uttered on this site, this is the winner.
ALL administrations lie, all of them hide the truth, all of them act out of parochial self interest, all of them. Lincoln lied, FDR lied, Reagan lied, Bush lied, Obama has and will do so again.
Grow up
timb (8f04c0) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:28 am(steps around another one)
carlitos (aa025a) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:34 amThe Dems and Reps were united in the war against terror. Nobody was interested in what could be the rights of enemy combatants. This should be her line of argument
I think you’re right. It’s too bad, isn’t it, that it’s rather late for that, since she already chose to use another line of argument, namely slandering many other people to avoid having to face far-left liberals about the decisions she made at the time.
But since she says she was not told it was being used at the time, I would give her the benefit of the doubt. At least until evidence points to the contrary.
The statements of (among others) Leon Panetta, Democrat liberal head of the CIA, which informed her, and Joe Lieberman, liberal Democrat who got a lot of CIA briefings also and said he got truth from them, ARE just some of the evidence pointing to the contrary.
What I see is a desperate attempt by the Reps to use this against her.
Panetta and Lieberman are not Republicans. Would have said that you are determined to see what your political lens permits rather than the facts of the matter, except that you have already admitted that Pelosi lied. So you know very well what the evidence is, and what it means. You’ve already said so.
no one you know (1ebbb1) — 5/16/2009 @ 10:37 amComment by no one you know — 5/16/2009 @ 10:37 am
The Emperor (09c9e3) — 5/16/2009 @ 11:30 amI am sure you know that the Reps are using this to fight her. Their aim is to pin part of the blame on her. They know their party messed up the last eight year. But they are not going down alone are they? They are taking Nancy Pelosi with them! This is not about finding out the truth. It’s same old game of politics they have been known to play.
What was that about giving people the benefit of the doubt? Strange that your sense of caution and fairness appears to be related to party affiliation.
Eric Blair (57b266) — 5/16/2009 @ 12:02 pm