Torture battle escalating, Pelosi vs. Boehner »
Posted By jovial 7 months, 1 week ago in News
President Obama opened a big can of worms by releasing the torture memos last week that the administration today sought to close with little success. nstead, a full-blown battle has opened between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, and her GOP counterpart, Ohio's John Boehner about how much top Congressional leaders knew about water boarding in 2002. It is being fueled in part by a timeline released by the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by another California Democrat, Dianne Feinstein.
Read Full Story at sfgate.com »
1356 Views Share Story 59 Comments Report
Submitted By:
jovial
Grew up In Brooklyn. Joined the Navy in 1976 stayed in 10 years. Aircraft Electronics tech. Worked for Major Govt. contractor then settled in California ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 55 of 59 Comments (view all)
-
94%
jovial7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A wall St. journal article is circulating around in the conservative blogosphere saying House speaker Nancy Pelosi knew about torture since 2002 and did nothing to try to stop it. Is this just just a pot of crabs trying to hold on to anything that they can grab on to. Nancy Pelosi addresses these questions and denies knowing anything at all about waterboarding actually being implemented. You decide.
Reply-
100%
bruhaha7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In the article Steven Johnson quotes, she is quoted as saying that she didn't know that waterboarding being implemented and that the planning for interrogation hadn't been completed at the time. Of course, Steven Johnson pulls out only the parts that would seem to indicate that Pelosi knew and approved of the waterboarding. Take into mind that the people claiming she knew and approved of the waterboarding are likely some of the same people that claim that Congress was given ALL the intelligence prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Reply -
83%
Candida7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA, Ms Pelosi: "What they did tell us is that they had some legislative counsel -- the Office of Legislative Counsel opinions that they could be used, but not that they would."
Reply
...
"And I have always been truly faithful to never disclosing, because that is what the law is, what happens in those briefings."
I'm sorry Ms. Pelosi, but this is weak, very weak. I'm sure those briefings weren't very open, but this shows that waterboarding was discussed, and that you knew that they were preparing the legal documents to cover their asses. OK, you didn't disclose that information to anybody else, but did you object to the people who briefed you? Did you tell them that this is torture and this is not what America is about? If you want the role of a puppet, then you are definitely in the wrong job.
We've all known for years now that torture was taking place, we just didn't have the official documents. I don't remember many members of the Congress clamoring for them. I guess Mr. Bush's astonishing lack of curiosity is contagious and it has infected members of Congress as well. There have always been a few brave souls who voted against wars, condemned torture, fought against illegal wiretapping, but they were a small minority.
Frankly, I don't care how many Democrats are implicated. I think the US would benefit from a thorough housecleaning. -
93%
Jeboba7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You mean the WSJ owned by Rupert Murdoch? The same propaganda mogul that owns FAUX news?
Reply
You cons just love to trot out your talking points and propaganda journals when you get desperate.
It wasn't just Pelosi. And they got cursory info that they had no part in reacting to and weren't asked if they approved or not and wouldn't have been allowed to anyway. The cursory briefing was just white house CYA so you cons could trot it out now if the deal blew up. plus in 2002 the cons wouldn't listen to the lowly minority dems anyway. Well the deal HAS blown up and the White House little tin dictator from 2000-2008 set up the DOJ to give him legal opinions to cover his butt if it blew up. It goes all the way up boys and he and cheney, et al are going down. Obama is trying to weasel but we are not letting up and will not let this slide. We don't want criminals in our White House and we must prosecute them if we expect the rest of the world to believe we are truly a democracy and nation of laws!
So go away cons. Your boys are going down for this. Stop trying to protect the Republican thugs and criminals in the White House who broke our laws! -
100%
epiphannyy7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My original stance remains unchanged. Appoint a special prosecutor and then get out of the way. Personally, I don't care who is responsible or whether they are republican or democrat. In my opinion, this isn't a partisan issue, it's an ethics issue, a humanitarian issue, and an American issue. Whoever is found to be complicit should face the consequences for their part. If Pelosi is found to be a party to this, she can face charges right alongside Cheney as far as I am concerned. The same goes for Beohner, Bush, and even Obama. WHOEVER is responsible and/or took an active part, whether it be by committing torture, authorizing torture, ordering torture, or having knowledge and refusing to stop torture deserves to be prosecuted accordingly.
Reply
That's what these GOP fanatics don't seem to get. This isn't a witch hunt like they are trying to make it seem. It's not about politics OR about which side of the aisle these people sit on. It's ALL about doing what's right and getting our equilibrium back as a country. Enough with the partisan distractions and deflections. Appoint the special prosecutor and then get out of the way. Let the facts lead the investigation and then prosecute accordingly, regardless of WHO is found to be culpable. It's the only legitimate course of action if we're ever to regain any credibility on the world stage or among our own citizenry. Enough is enough. The time for these petty partisan games is over. It's time to pay the piper. -
-
-
93%
berkeley7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
from the past, we know that boehner has zero credibility. but as it happens, pelosi also has zero. i wouldn't trust either of them about anything.
Reply
this is going to be fun. who can lie more? who can yell louder?
you did!
i did not!
it's really difficult to bet on pelosi.-
100%
lfergie8127 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Boehner is trying to get publicity to go for the Senate job when Voinovich retires and you're right he has no creditability. He is an opportunist that is taking the anti everything position and doesn't care about the future of the country. Only trying to promote himself.
Reply
I seriously doubt that Pelosi got all the information about all the tactics that were used to question captives and one has to remember that in 2002, anyone questioning the actions of our government were pegged a traitor. With that being said, I'm not a big fan of Pelosi and I believe there are more capable members of the house that could do a better job. She lost my respect when she ran on the platform of impeaching Bush/Cheney and backstroked after the election.
-
-
100%
Spadecaller7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"I know nothiiiiiiiiiing!" Those were the words of the amicable weak-minded Nazi from the old TV show called Hogans Heroes, who was always afraid he was going to be caught in his incompetence as a prison guard.
Reply
Yup... nobody knows a thing. Yet our nation invaded another country without justification and has been in the business of torturing prisoners in secret detention centers around the world and at Gitmo. But nobody knows anything.
I suspect that there is more than enough guilt on both sides of the aisle that they are all hoping Obama can make it all go away for them.
Career politicians do not give up their cherished positions with grace and dignity. If necessary, they will usually lie right down to the bitter end.
I do not know if Pelosi is telling the truth; but I will never forget that it did not take her long to become palsy-walsy with George Bush just after she became the Speaker of the House -- and all her election promises evaporated on the spot.
I clearly remember her starry-eyed stare into the prestigious void of the politically elite that her new position had brought her.
Her swift abandonment of her campaign promises leave me with a unsettling feeling; is she really telling the truth?
"I know nothiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing" I can hear the obese Nazi soldier pleading for everyone to leave him alone. I hear that same message echoing loudly in the halls of Washington. Nobody knows anything. Please leave us along. Yeah right!-
100%
lfergie8127 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I believe the name you're looking for is Schultz. Not sure of the spelling though but he feared being sent to the Russian front if caught. Like Schultz, these representatives fear being exposed but all one has to do is remember how it was before the Democrats regained control of congress. I'd take Pelosi over Gingrich or Hastert any day.
Reply
-
-
100%
CHAM7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What is sad is this is what we are showing to the world as our leaders. Both knew years ago that torture was occurring, that people were being tortured to death, and that the torture wasn't getting any viable information.
Reply
Water boarded some people more than 200 times? Why? Cause they didn't give all the info on number 199? Utter BS. They did it because they were sadistic.
I first knew about detainees being tortured to death at least 3 or 4 years ago, the first I knew of was Manadel Al Jamidi on Nov 4th 2003 by Navy Seals and Mercenaries at Abu Gharib. The soldier who reported the torture at Abu Gharib has had his life threatened and the two Generals who outed the torture have been dumped.
And it went on from there. Thousands of people have been tortured. The vast majority were innocent of anything. This is why we now have a problem in the Middle East. Those people don't look kindly on the United States.
In Afghanistan the Taliban offered to give up Bin Laden - before the invasion. In Iraq Saddam Hussein offered to go into exile prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Why did we invade anybody? And kill a million or more. And displace five million. And bankrupt our nation. Over 4,000 American soldiers died for nothing. Except to enshrine the Republican hero George Bush. The destroyer of our Democracy.-
100%
Eagle_Eye7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"In Afghanistan the Taliban offered to give up Bin Laden - before the invasion. In Iraq Saddam Hussein offered to go into exile prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Reply
Why did we invade anybody? And kill a million or more. And displace five million. And bankrupt our nation. Over 4,000 American soldiers died for nothing. Except to enshrine the Republican hero George Bush. The destroyer of our Democracy."
That's a real good question there CHAM -
100%
lfergie8127 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"In Afghanistan the Taliban offered to give up Bin Laden - before the invasion. In Iraq Saddam Hussein offered to go into exile prior to the invasion of Iraq."
Reply
The Taliban offered to give up Osama bin Laden in Feb. 2001 which was 7 months before the 9/11 attack and after the USS Cole attack. The CIA had already determined that bin Laden was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole and was wanted by the US for that attack. Bush did not follow through.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDvVZ2Gn-9g -
-
-
100%
bbalden7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's pretty hard to stomach the partisan jockeying that passes for representation these days. Fact is that Speaker Pelosi took impeachment - of possibly the most impeachable president in history - off the table the day she was named Speaker. If it is the sole Constitutional responsibility of Congress to impeach, I say that most of the majority Democratic Congress disregarded their oaths as surely as the profiteering gang in the White House. Both parties are part and parcel of every predicament we now find ouselves in. It's time to demand candor and accountability from every one of those who act in our collective names.
Reply-
100%
Jeboba7 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
rookb7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree, she let her duties slide. I think she wanted to get through the election and get the populace have a decent man in the white house. I don't know weather this had a more bennificial outcome, remember the house ans senate were in the hands of the Neo-cons. Nor it is time to prosecute the war criminals, including Bush.
Reply
Keep telling people like it is. The media is worthless and the only wepon we have against the rampant corporate political leverage is word of mouth. -
83%
DarkWizard7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
bbalden,
Reply
I don't recall seeing you here on Propeller, but you are correct in your statement of, "Fact is that Speaker Pelosi took impeachment - of possibly the most impeachable president in history - off the table the day she was named Speaker."
Many of us here warned that this stance would come back to bite democrats in the ass. In fact, it did make the democrats look both complicit in the actions of the Bush administration and in disregarding their constitutional duties of upholding rule of law.
FTA - "Boehner said Congressional leaders 'received an awful lot of information' about interrogations, and that 'not a word was raised at the time, not one word. And I think you're going to hear more and more about the bigger picture here, that ... the war on terror after 9/11 was done in a bipartisan basis on lots of fronts.'"
Taking impeachment off the table has given the republicans a foothold and set a dangerous precedent of bowing to the will of the republicans. Until democrats show some spine, like Kucinich has, the republicans will try to rub all the democrats' noses in the same pile of dog doo that most of republicans and only some of the democrats should be sniffing.
Pelosi, Reid, and other democrats that turned their backs on the people who voted them in are going to get a rude awaking from their constituents come next election cycle. Remember, they were voted in because people wanted immediate change and that's what these "impeachment is off the table" democrats refused to do.
Being held accountable is a bitch, but we can't hold republicans accountable unless we do the same to the democrats. Like the Pharisees, the "Do as I say and not as I do" act has worn thin with the majority of Americans (republicans/teabaggers/neocons being the exception). Pelosi and Reid are acting as cheerleaders for Obama in one breath and obstructionist enablers in the next breath. Lip service is not the change we can believe in.
-
-
100%
CHAM7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes they are both complicit. And they are going to remain that way until we prosecute people for their crimes.
Reply
Fergie says Bush didn't take up the Saddam offer to go into exile because he wanted him dead. I believe there's a lot of truth to that. But I think the overpowering reason was so that Bush minions and Bush's boss wanted the profits that a war would bring to the elites.
What it all boils down to is that the war was waged to profit a few at the expense of the many. When Israel bombed the Baghdad Reactor I did some research and found that the only weapons grade uranium that Iraq had was 17 lbs. They had yellow cake to run the reactor and after the Iraqi war this yellowcake was sold to Canada and presented to the public as proof positive that Saddam had a Nuclear Program. It was just a bunch of road apples. That yellow cake wouldn't make a bomb in the next thousand years and Bush and Rumsfelt knew it.
But that was back when Saddam was our Buddy. The U S was flying high with the Shah dictating over Iran and Saddam doing same of Iraq.
But things have a way of changing. Good always wins out in the long run. We don't ever need to forget that.
As Eisenhower said, "America is Great because America is Good, if American ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be Great."
Wise man that Republican. Yep the GOP ain't what it used to be. -
100%
Jeboba7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We started losing our moral compass as a nation in 1980 with the election of Ronald Reagan. A HORRIBLE President who deregulated everything and gave the farm to the wealthiest. And yet the cons idiolize the POS! They are just sheep, easily led by anybody that can talk tough and put on a good act rather than by thoughtful leaders.
Reply
And Gingrich thinks he can run for President? I guess he should. It will finally shut him up when he gets less than 1% of the vote. Gingrich is a hateful derisive little man that started the rancorous and hateful partisanship on the hill! -
100%
bbalden7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I take offense to the notion that we - as Americans have lost our moral compass. The people that I know, and - for the most part - the people that I pass on the street, I really believe are good, caring and generous people. I'll say it again. Americans are too sheepish to demand true representation and accountability of their elected officials. Well, I'll tell you who does demand reresentation. Corporate America. And it's only because corporate lobbies have chosen happily to fill the void that we leave for them. The sooner we demand what WE expect of our elected representation, the sooner we'll get it.
Reply -
100%
cloud157 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now that the memos are out and we have factual evidence against people cases should be brought forth. If it means a complete overhaul of our government representatives so be it. Anyone who approved of torture does not deserve to represent we the people.
Reply -
100%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
above discussions mention impeachment and it being taken off the table....
Reply
possibly for good reason....
now...
you can have criminal prosecutions.. while the person you're going to prosecute .. doesn't have access or the authority to destroy evidence.. all the records are sealed and in possession of the national archives ..
it's possible that they might find some of those "missing" e-mails.. -
100%
rookb7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Suonds like the Republican leader was knowledgable and complicit and the (seldom informed at the time) Democrat Pelosi did not know.
Reply
Bohner is an idiot, constantly grandstanding with little or false facts.
All of the instigators of torture should be convicted and in prison. We The USA have convicted Japenese and German war criminals for the EXACT THINGS. What was a crime then is still a crime now. The precident had been set.
I listened to Cheny the other day as he tried to justify the programs that the torture took place in. If ther was nothing wrong with it, why didn't he speak out when the guards of Abu Grabe Prison were sent to jail for carrying out these programs. He allowed others to go to prison and be ruined while he kept qiiet and hid behind the brave enlisted men and women of the armed services. Honor should not be resereved for the "Boots on the Ground" it should have beeen a part of the Bush's Administration goals, sadly there was no honor shown by the "Commander in Cheif". Thank god he's gone, let his shame never be forgotten.
If we prosecute those that started the torture as a standard procedure idiom, then the world will start to see the USA as the honorable and just country we once were. -
100%
worldwarrior27 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I see, Cheney has got his daughter on the talk show circuit trying to save his worthless ass from prison or the gallows. Torture is torture, no gray area's. Cheney and the rest of the Bu$h regime cronies should be prosecuted for waging a War of Aggresion against Iraq too. Remember the Nuremburg Trials at the end of WWII? We help establish that law to convict Germany leaders. So now, we are telling the world, U.S. leaders are ABOVE Intl. law. Do as we say, not as we do. Hypocritical, to say the least. Expect the Repubs, to spin, lie and deceive, to protect their own.
Reply -
-
100%
Goppy7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klarissa - I realize why you don't want to talk about George W. Bush - I don't particularly relish it either.
Reply
In my opinion, the Bush Presidency is best forgotten as a horrible, horrible time in America - a time of profound managerial incompetence, a time of stunning hypocrisy and moral contradiction ... not to mention an apalling effort to rewrite our Judicial Process and politicize Science through a perverse interpretation of Funamentalist Christianity - (which isn't really a Christian movement anyway - but rather an expression of hardline, narrow mided intolerance and punitive retribution).
Klarissa, Personally, I do really want to forget Bush.
But our nation has deeply held values that we've lived by throughout our history.
I realize that Modern Republicanism doesn't not believe in precendent - - - look at the Right Wing Activist Supreme Court Judges who believe that precedent has no legal standing - - - but the underpinning of our nation's values of freedom, justice, humanity, goodness are how we define ourselves as a nation.
And granted - there IS in America .. in-justice, in-humanity .. but the manner in which the Bush Administration FLAUNTED their lack of respect for our nation's values is just TOO audacious to ignore.
These people flaunted their disregard for our national values under the Flag of our Nation. To ignore their reprehensible conduct completely is to say we ... as a nation ... don't stand for ANYTHING.
.
-
-
-
-
-
100%
mesodude7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Natureboy, don't underestimate Nancy. I think she's got a stiff upper lip and I'm sure she can stand tall plus hold her own against multiple members. If anyone's prepared to take it on the chin it's Nancy Pelosi. Just think of all those gangbangers she's had to take on in CA. Now she's on top and naturally jealous Republicans want to see her go down. The question is how long can they keep this up? ;-(
Reply
-
-
100%
worldwarrior27 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cheney's reign of torture began in C. America during the 1980's Reagan/Bu$h illegal wars in the region to prop up wealthy brutal right-wing dictatorships and death squads. A CIA torture manual was produced by Cheney, Rumsfeld and Ollie North to be used on poor, uneducated, innocent peasants to scare them from serving in the ranks of liberation movements and to substract info. It didn't work then and it doesn't work now. Socialist gov't are now back in power in the region after Capitalism proved to be a complete failure regarding lifting the living standards of the masses. Anyway, Cheney and his bunch we're never tried as war criminal then, so they thought they could get away with it again in Iraq and Afghanistan. We shall see if our politicians have developed a backbone to prosecute over the last thirty years. Cheney and his cohorts, think not.
Reply -
100%
worldwarrior27 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Prosecute the Bu$h regime for waging a War of Aggression against Iraq. German leaders were prosecuted for that at the Nuremburg Trials after WWII. The U.S. helped produced those laws, our leaders have broke. Are U.S. leaders above the law?
Reply -
-
-
100%
jovial7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So simple for you, huh? Either you torture them or you pat them on the back. What you fail to realize is that not all of the prisoners tortured were terrorists. Then there's that little nagging problem about breaking the law, our own law. The one drew up during the Reagan administration that said the U.S. won't torture. Then the other nagging problem of a sitiing U.S. president telling th the American people and the world, that "we don't torture". Then directing a legal team to soften the laws to make it sound like it wasn't torture and release memo's to to the CIA allowing them to break our laws. The only reason those methode were employed and I truly believe this is that Bush and certain others in the upper echelon of his administration needed proof of a Saddam-Al Qaeda link. When they couldn't get that information through torture, they invented some tale of yellowcake and biological weapons. Then the interrogations intensified. Torture was used again and more frequently to try to find the WMD that Bush used to justify his invasion of Iraq. He never found it. Cheney was the one who probably influenced Bush to permit this illegal torture to flourish. Remember Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld were from the "old school" They were involved with government during the Iran-Contra scandal. They knew what torture was and they had used it quite liberally in Central America during the 1980's.
Reply
-
-
17%
injest7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nancy Pelosi addresses these questions and denies knowing anything at all about waterboarding actually being implemented. You decide.
Reply
Tough call. If the claim is “Nancy Pelosi denies knowing anything at all” I would have to say its true.
However once this claim IS put INTO CONTEXT
“Nancy Pelosi addresses these questions and denies knowing anything at all about waterboarding actually being implemented”
I’d have to say she is lying.
This is real a simple question to prove, all Obama has to do is the Director of National Intelligence give a list of who attended these virtual tour/ info session when and where.
Oh and also how much “Ice Tea” they were drinking.-
80%
jovial7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well as the story unfolds we will see. The problem is as i see it, who directed it to be implemented. The whole world knew that it was being implemented, (at least all the progressives i know did), but couldn't do anything because the White House denied it was being done. Pelosi may even have been aware it was being done, but couldn't talk about it due to her security clearance. All in all, your happiness with Pelosi being implicated in this whole affair, may be short-lived. Even if they do take Pelosi down, the number of Republicans that go down with her will be devastating to a Republican party that is already on the ropes. So in your case from a political standpoint, I'd continue to wish the truth never be told.
Reply
-
-
-
-
83%
Tcaros7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's the old Republican trick: If they were breaking the laws then "everyone else knew about it", right? Wrong!
Reply
The Republicans are trying the same "straw man" argument here. This is how they work it: accuse the other part of doing what you did.
Won't work Mr. Boehner. -
14%
injest7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
“Nancy Pelosi addresses these questions and denies knowing anything at all about waterboarding actually being implemented. You decide.”
Reply
jovial
“Well as the story unfolds we will see. The problem is as i see it, who directed it to be implemented. The whole world knew that it was being implemented, (at least all the progressives i know did)”
So what “world” is Nancy Pelosi in?
She claims she did not know.
BTW the article is NOT about “implemented it”. The article is about WHO KNEW it was being done in 2002 onward.
Who approved it.
Who in Congress BOTH knew about it AND allowed it.
Remember the Dems controlled the Senate 2001 to 2003
I predict before the weekend is out Obama will again flip-flop on this issue again.
I would like to know who asked “if the methods were tough enough”.
The methods, including Waterboarding were “tough enough”
25% chance it was Pelosi
50% chance that question came from a Democrat.
And a 100% reality that they knew (as you say you did) that Waterboarding was being done.
"Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say
By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 9, 2007; Page A01"
"In fairness, the environment was different then because we were closer to Sept. 11 and people were still in a panic," said one U.S. official present during the early briefings. "But there was no objecting, no hand-wringing. The attitude was, 'We don't care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people.' "
U.S. law requires the CIA to inform Congress of covert activities and allows the briefings to be limited in certain highly sensitive cases to a "Gang of Eight," including the four top congressional leaders of both parties as well as the four senior intelligence committee members. In this case, most briefings about detainee programs were limited to the "Gang of Four," the top Republican and Democrat on the two committees. A few staff members were permitted to attend some of the briefings" -
17%
injest7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
“Nancy Pelosi addresses these questions and denies knowing anything at all about waterboarding actually being implemented. You decide.”
Reply
jovial
“Well as the story unfolds we will see. The problem is as i see it, who directed it to be implemented. The whole world knew that it was being implemented, (at least all the progressives i know did)”
So what “world” is Nancy Pelosi in?
She claims she did not know.
BTW the article is NOT about “implemented it”. The article is about WHO KNEW it was being done in 2002 onward.
Who approved it.
Who in Congress BOTH knew about it AND allowed it.
Remember the Dems controlled the Senate 2001 to 2003
I predict before the weekend is out Obama will again flip-flop on this issue again.
I would like to know who asked “if the methods were tough enough”.
The methods, including Waterboarding were “tough enough”
25% chance it was Pelosi
50% chance that question came from a Democrat.
And a 100% reality that they knew (as you say you did) that Waterboarding was being done.
"Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say
By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 9, 2007; Page A01"
"In fairness, the environment was different then because we were closer to Sept. 11 and people were still in a panic," said one U.S. official present during the early briefings. "But there was no objecting, no hand-wringing. The attitude was, 'We don't care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people.' "
U.S. law requires the CIA to inform Congress of covert activities and allows the briefings to be limited in certain highly sensitive cases to a "Gang of Eight," including the four top congressional leaders of both parties as well as the four senior intelligence committee members. In this case, most briefings about detainee programs were limited to the "Gang of Four," the top Republican and Democrat on the two committees. A few staff members were permitted to attend some of the briefings"-
100%
jovial7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Those percentages you quoted are made up and by all means you guys go after Pelosi. She probably knows enough to bring the whole Bush cabal tumbling down. Currently the Democrats are in a good position to gain a few seats by attrition. A lot of Democrats don't like Pelosi anyway, because she blocked impeachment hearings. Go ahead, make my day. Take Pelosi down and then allow her to sing. To sing about all she knows about the Bush administration and their complicity in torture. Don't forget to take down all the Republicans that were complicit as well. If they committed war crimes, take them all down. Remember, it will be more of a scandal on the Republican party than the Democrats. So be my guest. Maybe we will get that Senate majority after all. much sooner than expected. LOL!
Reply -
100%
jovial7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here the list of House Congressional members on that committee. Note that this doesn't include the Senate.
Reply
The House Intelligence Committee members in August 2002 in order of seniority:
Porter Goss (R-FL)
Doug Bereuter (R-NE)
Michael N. Castle (R-DE)
Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-NY)
Jim Gibbons (R-NV)
Ray LaHood (R-IL)
Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA)
Peter Hoekstra (R-MI, now ranking member)
Richard Burr (R-NC)
Saxby Chambliss (R-NC)
Leonard Boswell (D-IA, joined the committee in 2001)
Terry Everett (R-AL, joined the committee in 2002)
Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
Sanford D. Bishop (D-GA)
Jane Harman (D-CA)
Gary A. Condit (D-CA)
Tim Roemer (D-IA)
Silvestre Reyes (D-TX, now chair, joined the committee in 2001)
Leonard L. Boswell (D-IA)
Collin C. Peterson (D-MN)
Bud Cramer (D-AL, joined the committee in 2002)
J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL, Ex Officio)
Richard A. Gephardt (D-MO, Ex Officio)
Notice the top 10 senior members are Republicans.
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.