Pelosi Knew!!!! »
Posted By tehranchik 6 months ago in Political NewsThe report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.
Pelosi, D-Calif., sharply disputed suggestions last month that she had been told about waterboarding having taken place.
“In that or any other briefing . . . we were not, and I repeat, were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation techniques were used," Pelosi said at a news conference in April. "What they did tell us is that they had some legislative counsel . . . opinions that they could be used, but not that they would."
Read Full Story at blogs.abcnews.com »
504 Views Share Story 45 Comments Report
Submitted By:
tehranchik
Well, I'm from and live in the Pacific Northwest. I did live in the middle east during the late 70's and early 80 ...
Who Also Submitted:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 45 (view all)
-
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Matthews falsely asserted CIA doc says Pelosi was briefed on "the use of waterboarding"
Reply
May 08, 2009 9:22 pm ET
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
EMBED
Embed this video:
SUMMARY: Chris Matthews falsely asserted that a CIA document stated that Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the "use of waterboarding on Abu Zubaydah." In fact, the document stated only that Pelosi was briefed "on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah."
1 Comments
On the May 8 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, purporting to quote from a recently released Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) document, host Chris Matthews falsely asserted that the document stated that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was briefed on the "use of waterboarding on Abu Zubaydah." In fact, the document, which details "Member Briefings on Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs)," stated only that during a September 4, 2002, briefing, Pelosi was briefed "on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah [emphasis added]."
Matthews said that Pelosi "got a briefing on, quote, 'enhanced intelligence techniques, including the use of waterboarding on Abu Zubaydah, the background on authorities, and a description of the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that were employed.' " Matthews then added, "So, she got it all." In fact, the document -- which was displayed on screen during the discussion -- did not state that Pelosi was briefed on "the use of waterboarding on Abu Zubaydah," but only that the briefing included the "use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah." From the May 8 edition of Hardball:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200905080037
-
-
92%
Spadecaller6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It may be politically unpopular among some members of both parties, but President Obama and responsible members of Congress need to step forward once and for all and call for a thorough investigation. Enough with protecting those that have either committed crimes or those that were complicit and looked the other way.
Reply
WE need a good dry cleaning in Washington.-
-
30%
Endoscopy6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The fact that far left people like you never want to recognize is that nothing illegal was done. Several members of congress are on record stating that in 2002 congress was given breifings for all members that wanted to attend about what methods were to be used. It was leaked by the door keepers that all except one was in favor of the methods and many asked if harsher methods could be used.
Reply
Also the far lefties always ignore our federal law and it requires pain, threat of pain or death, or permanent damage to be torture. Go look it up I have posted it many times. Do not use Wikipedia since who knows what has been added or modified but the actual law itself. Do not try to use the treaty route because the Senate ALWAYS makes exceptions if a treaty is in variance to US laws. -
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Breaking News!! CIA Manipulating Briefing Process!!
Reply
No. Not really breaking. We knew that CIA was playing around with its obligation to inform the intelligence committees before it starts any big new projects--like opening torture factories around the world.
But that's the real story of this briefing list--aside from what a bunch right wingers are claiming it says, the actual details of the briefing list notwithstanding. The real story is that the CIA was playing a bunch of games to be able to claim it had informed Congress, even while only informing some of Congress some things.
First, CIA has officially confirmed what I have been saying for weeks. The CIA first briefed Congress on torture on September 4, 2002, 35 days after CIA purportedly began waterboarding and much longer after we know CIA started torturing Abu Zubaydah. Moreover, we have on the record statements from Pelosi and Goss (and I've had even stronger assurances elsewhere) that CIA did not tell Congress they were already in the business of torture. Their discussions of torture were all prospective, and they may even have stated clearly that they had not used these techniques yet, which (if true) would be a clear and direct lie to Congress.
Second, look at when--according to the CIA's specific assertions--they first talked about waterboarding to members of Congress:
February 4, 2003: Pat Roberts and a Republican and a Democratic staffer (but not Jello Jay); according to the CIA there was no specific mention of waterboarding in the February 5, 2003 briefing for Porter Goss and Jane Harman
July 13, 2004: Porter Goss and Jane Harman
July 15, 2004: Pat Roberts and Jello Jay
Now, it's possible that the people trying to smear Pelosi with this are correct and CIA mentioned waterboarding in September 2002. But that's not what the CIA says. Once you account for the fact that Jello Jay did not attend the February 4 briefing, the CIA says it first informed Democrats about waterboarding in July 2004, only after the CIA's own Inspector General had declared the program cruel and inhuman (and note, the Senate intelligence leaders, at least, got a copy of that document in June 2004, so the CIA couldn't very well pretend that they hadn't been waterboarding).
Note, too, that the CIA claims to have discussed legal issues in the July briefing with Harman and Goss, but not in the July briefing with Jello Jay and Roberts. We know this to be false.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/08/break...
-
-
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What Did Pelosi Know About Torture And What Could She Have Done About It?
Reply
"Pelsoi’s spokesperson, Brendan Daly, reiterated this position yesterday, stating, “As this document shows, the speaker was briefed only once, in September 2002. The briefers described these techniques, said they were legal, but said that waterboarding had not been used.” But in a one-sentence description of the meeting, the CIA document states the Pelosi was given a “description of enhanced interrogation techniques” that were used on Abu Zubaydah. Based on Daly’s statement, it appears that Pelosi was in fact aware that at least some of the “enhanced techniques” — though not waterboarding — had been used.
That said, in a letter accompanying the new documents, CIA Director Leon Panetta explains that it is possible that the CIA’s description of the briefing is inaccurate. Panetta explains that its report is based on the “best recollections” of those in attendance and states that the Senate Intelligence Committee, to whom they sent the report, “will have to determine whether this information is an accurate summary of what actually happened”:
While it remains unclear what Pelosi knew and when she knew it, it should not be forgotten that Pelosi did not write the memos authorizing the use of torture or carry that torture out; the Bush administration did. Further, the CIA briefed Pelosi without staff, told her their practices were legal, and forbade her from discussing the meeting with colleagues. As such, Pelosi could not work to “outlaw the practices.” Marc Ambinder notes that the only way Pelosi could have registered her objections at that time was to “walk out of the briefing, telling those CIA officials who came that what she just heard did not constitute a formal briefing.” The result? The CIA would have simply tried to re-brief her at a later date, but the Bush administration would have continued to carry out torture anyways."
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/08/pelosi-torture...
-
-
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned4 Replies
-
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CRYMTYPHON, with all due respect, I really don't think this information sheds any remarkably different information than we already knew. If Pelosi is proven to have known all along, I absolutely think she should step down but I don't think we know all the relevant facts just yet.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
100%
CRYMTYPHON6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Jail time for all!
Reply
Why not?
It is not the purpose of the Democratic Party
to stuff as many bodies labeled 'Democrat'
into expensive chairs of State, as it can.
We want the economy fixed.
We want Americans to have jobs.
We want a health system that other countries don't laugh at.
We want an America with a future beyond Chinese servitude.
And we don't want creepy moral sliders signing secret 'torture' orders in the
domed capital building where freedom and justice are etching into the marble.
We can get somebody else elected
that won't play all sides of moral issues.
America needs to regain some ambition about its leaders. -
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Countdown: What was Pelosi Told
Reply
video:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/
-
-
-
75%
gamahuche6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Now this is sweet from this source!
Reply
This whole thread is reading topsy turvy - except that both this version and another which is also currently on propeller, posted by Cowboygrandpa are notable for the fact that the "usual democrats" are as insistent on this matter being dealt with thoroughly and properly as the "usual cons" are - except for the poster above. -
75%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As much as I despise Pelosi and would love to see her raked thru the coals......it's time to move on. No good will come of this. Like Rambo said in "First Blood", let it go."
Reply
-- How generous of you. Right. If you people thought Pelosi alone would take the fall for this, you'd be all over this trying to promote it. Guess what? Not everyone is willing to pimp his or her soul for political gain. *If* it's determined that Pelosi "knew all" (whatever the hell that even means), then she should suffer the consequences. We need to get to the bottom of this, regardless of who might have been involved.
-
-
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CIA Lying to ABC about Torture. Again. ABC Reporting It Uncritically. Again.
Reply
By: emptywheel Thursday May 7, 2009 8:21 pm
As bmaz has reported, the CIA has sent a list of torture briefings to Crazy Pete Hoekstra on when and whom in Congress got briefed that the CIA was in the torture business. And ABC news, just off having to admit the CIA lied to them about torture in the past, has taken what the CIA gave them and treated it totally uncritically. Again.
Based on the list (which I've also obtained), they're out with a post claiming they've caught Pelosi in a contradiction.
The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics.
Setting aside the fact that the list doesn't mention waterboarding specifically in its description of that briefing (it does in quite a few others), there are huge problems with using the list as a basis to claim anything.
First, there's this paragraph the CIA included in the letter they sent with the briefing list to Crazy Pete (which ABC didn't think important enough to include when they first posted this story):
This letter presents the most thorough information we have on dates, locations, and names of all Members of Congress who were briefed by the CIA on enhanced interrogation techniques. This information, however, is drawn from the past files of the CIA and represents MFRs completed at the time and notes that summarized the best recollections of those individuals. In the end, you and the Committee will have to determine whether this information is an accurate summary of what actually happened. We can make the MFRs available at CIA for staff review. [my emphasis]
CIA: "Here's a list, but we won't vouch for its accuracy."
ABC: "We've proven that Nancy was wrong!!"
ABC, after having been burned in the past, took documents that the CIA itself said might not be accurate, and treated them as accurate.
But it gets worse. ABC printed the following description, as if it were an accurate representation of the next set of torture briefings, which took place in February 2003.
On Feb. 4, 2003, a briefing on “enhanced interrogation techniques” for Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., revealed that interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and Abd Al-Rahim Al-Nashiri were taped.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/07/cia-l...
-
-
-
0%
lglguru6 months ago
-
100%
mesodude6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"One related point: I'm truly amazed to watch the eruption of "controversy" today over the fact that Nancy Pelosi was briefed in 2002 on various aspects of the CIA's interrogation program, as though (a) this is some sort of new revelation and (b) it has any bearing on whether there should be investigations and prosecutions into Bush crimes. As many of us have long pointed out, the extent to which Democratic leaders in Congress were complicit in Bush lawbreaking -- including torture -- is a major issue that needs resolution, and is almost certainly a key reason why there have been no investigations thus far. There are real disputes still about what these Democrats were and were not told -- how complete the briefings were, the extent to which they obfuscated rather than illuminated what the CIA was doing -- though they were obviously told enough to have warranted further action on their part, to say the least.
Reply
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
But what's the point of all of this? Secretly telling Nancy Pelosi that you're committing crimes doesn't mean that you have the right to do so. And the profound failures of the other institutions that are supposed to check executive lawbreaking during the Bush era -- principally Congress and the "opposition party" -- is a vital issue that demands serious examination. This dispute over what Pelosi (and Jay Rockefeller and others) knew highlights, rather than negates, the need for a meaningful investigation into what took place."
-
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.