Comments for Karl Rove: Speaker Pelosi Is an Accomplice to "Torture" »
Posted By pc25 7 months, 3 weeks ago in NewsSpeaker Pelosi- Accomplice to "torture"
Pelosi has ensnared herself in a web of lies.
Karl Rove points out the disgraceful political tactics used by Pelosi and democrats today. These same officials who remained silent after 9-11 are suddenly outraged at government officials who designed the programs that kept America safe after 9-11.
Read Full Story at gatewaypundit.blogspot.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 131
-
67%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Democrats really need to be careful with what they define an d how they define it. Maybe they will learn a less from this as it is now blowing up in their face
Reply
Rove's full article is here
Congress and Waterboarding
Nancy Pelosi was an accomplice to 'torture.'
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124226863721018193...
Someone important appears not to be telling the truth about her knowledge of the CIA's use of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs). That someone is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. The political persecution of Bush administration officials she has been pushing may now ensnare her.
Here's what we know. On Sept. 4, 2002, less than a year after 9/11, the CIA briefed Rep. Porter Goss, then House Intelligence Committee chairman, and Mrs. Pelosi, then the committee's ranking Democrat, on EITs including waterboarding. They were the first members of Congress to be informed.
t is clear that after the 9/11 attacks Mrs. Pelosi was briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques and the valuable information they produced. She not only agreed with what was being done, she apparently pressed the CIA to do more.
But when political winds shifted, Mrs. Pelosi seems to have decided to use enhanced interrogation as an issue to attack Republicans. It is disgraceful that Democrats who discovered their outrage years after the fact are now braying for disbarment of the government lawyers who justified EITs and the prosecution of Bush administration officials who authorized them. Mrs. Pelosi is hip-deep in dangerous waters, and they are rapidly rising.
Pelosi is one phony, fraudlent, grimy, scheisty Dem.-
64%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Rove falsely smears Pelosi as "an accomplice" to torture
Reply
In his May 14 Wall Street Journal column, Karl Rove claimed that because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was allegedly "informed" in 2002 of the Bush administration's plans to use enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) on detainees, her non-action made her "an accomplice to 'torture.' " Rove wrote: "On Sept. 4, 2002, less than a year after 9/11, the CIA briefed Rep. Porter Goss, then House Intelligence Committee chairman, and Mrs. Pelosi, then the committee's ranking Democrat, on EITs including waterboarding." Rove later asserted: "If Mrs. Pelosi considers the enhanced interrogation techniques to be torture, didn't she have a responsibility to complain at the time, introduce legislation to end the practices, or attempt to deny funding for the CIA's use of them? If she knew what was going on and did nothing, does that make her an accessory to a crime of torture, as many Democrats are calling enhanced interrogation? ... Are [Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers (D-MI)] and other similarly minded Democrats willing to have Mrs. Pelosi thrown into their stew of torture conspirators as an accomplice?"
Rove's claim is not consistent with either the definition of "accomplice" or with the reality of Pelosi's ability to influence the Bush administration's conduct of interrogations. Black's Law Dictionary defines an accomplice as "[o]ne who knowingly, voluntarily and with common intent unites with the principal offender in the commission of a crime." Black's states further: "One is liable as an accomplice to the crime of another if he gave assistance or encouragement or failed to perform a legal duty to prevent it with the intent thereby to promote or facilitate commission of the crime."
But Pelosi could not have "failed to perform a legal duty to prevent" the conduct if she was in fact powerless to stop it. As Vicki Divoll, a former deputy counsel to the CIA Counterterrorist Center and general counsel of the Senate Intelligence Committee from 2001 to 2003, wrote in a May 12 New York Times op-ed: "[A]s a practical matter, there was very little, if anything, the Gang of Four [in 2002: former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL), former Rep. Porter Goss (R-FL), and Pelosi] could have done to affect the Bush administration's decision on the enhanced interrogation techniques program."
http://mediamatters.org/research/200905140031-
57%
Hhussk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In his May 14 Wall Street Journal column, Karl Rove claimed that because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) was allegedly "informed" in 2002 of the Bush administration's plans to use enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) on detainees, her non-action made her "an accomplice to 'torture.'
Reply
Allegedly? LOL Now she's calling the CIA a bunch of liars. Typical nihiliberals, always trying to make the United States the bad guy. Pelosi has been caught.-
100%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Allegedly? LOL Now she's calling the CIA a bunch of liars."
Reply
--Yes. Allegedly means it hasn't been proven. And I think she's very gutsy to take on the CIA. That doesn't strike me as something someone who was guilty would do. ;-P
"Typical nihiliberals, always trying to make the United States the bad guy. Pelosi has been caught."
--Hehehe...I love cons' selective use of pronouns. One minute you'll claim that "the government" is all bad and can't do anything right then in the next breath you want us to believe that "the United States" is beyond reproach (unless you mean Obama's "United States" in which case "the government" is corrupt beyond repair and must be overthrown with teabag parties). ROTFLMAO -
Neutral
hamy7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So, just because she knew what they were planning to do, she is as guilty as the president and vice president who actually authorized torturing human beings?
Reply
It's ridiculous. It's deflection. It's par for the course for the most corrupt and vile administration in our nation's history.
-
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
-
70%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah the irony of it all......seems the Dem are in retreat on this as Chris "I get an erection every time I hear Obama speak" Matthews announces "Sometimes, you gotta torture"
Reply
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/14/matthews-som...-
67%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've got your "retreat" right *here,* pc. ;-P
Reply
Pelosi: ‘At Every Step Of The Way, The Administration Was Misleading The Congress’
"In the Wall Street Journal this morning, Karl Rove declared that House Speaker Nancy Pelsoi (D-CA) was “an accomplice to ‘torture,’” repeating the right wing’s latest talking point that Pelosi is responsible for Bush’s torture program and should be demonized — even as Rove insists it wasn’t really “torture” and actually was a really great program.
This morning, Pelosi held a press conference to address these allegations. Reading a statement, she said that the CIA had told her in September 2002 — falsely — that waterboarding was not being used:
PELOSI: The CIA briefed me only once on enhanced interrogation techniques in September 2002, in my capacity as ranking member of the intelligence committee. I was informed then that the Department of Justice opinions had concluded that the use of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques were legal. The only mention of waterboarding at that briefing was that it was not being employed. [...]
We also now know that techniques including waterboarding had already been employed and that those briefing me had given me inaccurate and incomplete information. At the same time the Bush administration…was misleading the American people about the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Indeed, we now know that the CIA had waterboarded Abu Zubaydah 83 times in August, 2002, after receiving approval from Condoleezza Rice in July.
Pelosi also accused the CIA and the Bush administration of repeatedly misleading Congress and the American people, and repeated her call for a truth commission to examine the issue:
PELOSI: So on the subject of what’s happening in Iraq, when it’s talking about the techniques used by the intelligence community on those they’re interrogating, at every step of the way, the administration was misleading the Congress. And that is the issue. And that is why we need a truth commission to look into the issue.
REPORTER: So Madame Speaker, just to be clear, you’re accusing the CIA of lying to you in September of 2002?
PELOSI: Yes. Misleading the Congress of the United States.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/14/karl-rov...-
53%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
-
73%
PapaWolf7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How is it blowing up? The Dems are still holding hearings - didn't you see clips of the one from yesterday w/an FBI interrogator who said ti WAS torture, that he got more out of the prisoner with his standard techniques, & the prisoner clammed up after he was waterboarding.
Reply
And if I have to chose between believing Pelosi & or Rove, who we KNOW lies thru his teeth, I'll take Pelosi.-
-
-
-
-
50%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Meso, I grow tired of your baseless accusations. Let me know when it finally sinks in that I had many problems with Bush."
Reply
--Oh, lighten up, tangy. I don't know what you supported. I just like to say that because I know you'll overreact like you just did. Anyway, it doesn't really matter. If you had misgivings about some of what occurred under the Bush administration, that's precisely the reason you shouldn't be rushing to judgment. I'm astonished at how many cons are pretending they don't know about missing billions in Iraq, missing millions of White House email, and a Justice Department that was being used as a tool for political gain. Those things (among many others) are examples of how unclean Bush and Cheney are and that's why you people shouldn't be claiming you know this or that for a fact. You've been proven wrong too many times.
That most cons here are doing what they always do--supporting the GOP no matter what is just more proof that you'll do anything to hold onto power. This is all coming out and the Republican party will shrink even smaller. It's not looking good for you guys at all.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
50%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"she is a lying sack of steaming sh... I hope she takes on the CIA ........she is going to loose that......this is blowing up in the DEMS face. big time........"
Reply
--Nancy seems calm, cool, and very much in control (as does Obama). You cons, otoh, seem just a little bit unstable, pc. Might wanna get counseling for your anger issues. ;-P-
63%
Hhussk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
--Nancy seems calm, cool, and very much in control (as does Obama). You cons, otoh, seem just a little bit unstable, pc. Might wanna get counseling for your anger issues. ;-P
Reply
LOL. Obviously you didn't see her press conference. It's all over the news about how terrible she handled herself.
Of course, I'm sure you're still cheerleading.
-
-
-
-
-
-
stalemateComment removed: Retracted by user13 Replies
-
75%
DaneL7 months, 3 weeks ago
-
77%
Will13137 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
64%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
-
100%
Will13137 months, 3 weeks ago
-
75%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
-
-
86%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
From what I understand, they ruthlessly overpowered the GOP when Bush was in office and Republicans controlled Congress. Frank and Dodd had secret powers that the Republicans in the minority have but have chosen not to use because...well, that's just the kinda people Republicans are. Those ACORN folks were somehow involved in the coup orchestrated by Frank and Dodd. I don't know all the details but I think ACORN is supposed to be more powerful than the Pharmaceuticals, Big Oil, The Gun Lobby, and Insurance companies combined. They may be a non-profit organization for the poor and low income people but ACORN is just powerful beyond our wildest dreams. Anyway, the GOP currently has enormous power but they're just restraining themselves until the *right* moment comes along. ;-P
Reply -
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned3 Replies
-
-
-
-
-
57%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"bring it on.....there is a reason Obama will not declassigy the documents that Cheney requested........"
Reply
--You're obviously confused after the last 8 years. This is not up to Obama. That's why more of Bush and Cheney's lies and crimes are unraveling by the day--because there are three co-equal branches of government. Rove will go down for this or the Justice Department crimes. He's done. I admire cons for putting up a brave front but your party is freaking DEAD. ;-(
-
-
-
57%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Why do you think he is not pushing this..."
Reply
-My theory is that Obama knows Congressional cons have their plates full--thinking of different ways to say "no," promoting more teabag parties and coming up with cool catchy labels for the Democratic Party (which I think we all know is a sure fire way of attracting more voters). He doesn't want to overwhelm them. ;-P-
67%
Hhussk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
-My theory is that Obama knows Congressional cons have their plates full--thinking of different ways to say "no," promoting more teabag parties and coming up with cool catchy labels for the Democratic Party (which I think we all know is a sure fire way of attracting more voters). He doesn't want to overwhelm them. ;-P
Reply
In other words, he's not fulfilling his promises for transparency because the Democrats are in Congress.-
67%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"In other words, he's not fulfilling his promises for transparency because the Democrats are in Congress."
Reply
--But if you really wanted that then you would have voted for him. Otherwise, what should lead anyone to believe cons are interested in transparency?
-
-
-
-
100%
coolslow7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Love it. Get a Truth Commission, get some real investigative reporting, shine some light on on the whole deal from beginning to end. Get everyone on record and see where they stood, what they said, how they voted, and stop all the ********.
Reply
-
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive5 Replies
-
-
57%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then don't take her word for it. Take his...
Reply
Graham: CIA Gave Me False Information About Interrogation Briefings
In testimony that could bolster Speaker Nancy Pelosi's claim that the CIA misled her during briefings on detainee interrogations, former Senator Bob Graham insisted on Thursday that he too was kept in the dark about the use of waterboarding, and called the agency's records on these briefings "suspect."
In an interview with the Huffington Post, the former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman said that approximately a month ago, the CIA provided him with false information about how many times and when he was briefed on enhanced interrogations.
"When this issue started to resurface I called the appropriate people in the agency and said I would like to know the dates from your records that briefings were held," Graham recalled. "And they contacted me and gave me four dates -- two in April '02 and two in September '02. Now, one of the things I do, and for which I have taken some flack, is keep a spiral notebook of what I do throughout the day. And so I went through my records and through a combination of my daily schedule, which I keep, and my notebooks, I confirmed and the CIA agreed that my notes were accurate; that three of those four dates there had been no briefing. There was only one day that I had been briefed, which was September the 27th of 2002."
As for the one briefing he did attend, the Florida Democrat said that he had "no recollection that issues such as waterboarding were discussed." He was not, per the sensitive nature of the matters discussed, allowed to take notes at the time. But he did highlight what he considered to be pretty strong proof that the controversial technique was not discussed.
"What struck me...was the fact that in that briefing, there were also two staff members," he said. "As you know, the general rule is that the executive is to brief the full committees of the House and Senate Intelligence committees about any ongoing or proposed action. The exception to that is what is called "covert action," where the president...only briefs the Gang of Eight, which is the four congressional leaders and the four intelligence committee leaders. Those sessions are generally conducted at an executive site, primarily at the White House itself. And they are conducted with just the authorized personnel, not with any staff or any other member of the committee.... Which leads me to conclude that this was not considered by the CIA to be a Gang of Eight briefing. Otherwise they would not have had staff in the room. And that leads me to then believe that they didn't brief us on any of the sensitive programs such as the waterboarding or other forms of excessive interrogation."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/the-news/reporting/s...-
-
-
33%
stephen-johnson7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"no acknowledgment of the possibility that it's not just an issue of Pelosi's word against that of Cheney and the CIA."
Reply
No, it's an issue of Pelosi's word against Pelosi's word:
"Nancy Pelosi is a woman of many talents. Yesterday, she performed the delicate art of backtracking while walking sideways.
The speaker of the House had just read a statement accusing the CIA of lying and was trying to beat a hasty retreat from her news conference before reporters could point out contradictions between her current position and her previous statements."-
Neutral
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The speaker of the House had just read a statement accusing the CIA of lying and was trying to beat a hasty retreat from her news conference before reporters could point out contradictions between her current position and her previous statements."
Reply
--But what cons seem to forget that it wasn't Pelosi who lied hundred and HUNDREDS of times before we even went to war. That was Bush In fact, I think there was a study that he'd lied like almost 1000 times. If you're so concerned about inconsistencies, maybe you should be focused on those who have demonstrated a remarkable propensity to lie. Exactly... Bush and Cheney.-
100%
stephen-johnson7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"But what cons seem to forget that it wasn't Pelosi who lied hundred and HUNDREDS of times"
Reply
She lied at least that many times during her "press conference" yesterday before she beat a hasty retreat. You're defending that? What a joke.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
93%
icono17 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Where is the promised honesty, the transparency, the sharing of responsibility, the bipartisan equality of a new way of doing business at the Govt level......
Reply
But as F. Nietzsche said about such things in his work "Beyond Good and Evil";
"The criminal is often enough not equal to his deed: he extenuates and maligns it."
and
"The advocates of a criminal are seldom artists enough to turn the beautiful terribleness of the deed to the advantage of the doer."
From what I've seen and heard Pelosi is getting in deeper and deeper trouble especially with the CIA(Cherry picking 'facts' against the CIA is always a dangerous and stupid game to play for any DC politician to play..); this is definitely not what the DNC wants. This whole affair, as I understand it, was supposed to make the Bush admin look bad, which is not a hard trick to pull off, but this is making the Dems looks bad instead.
Business as usual in DC; change you can believe in.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... -
-
-
-
-
100%
pc257 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
get used to it meso she's toast and she;s going down.........Obama's own CIA director said Pelosi is lying
Reply
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/cia-director-f...
-
-
-
-
75%
bubba27 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Pelosi is apparently lying and trying to cover her tracks.
Reply
I've been unhappy with Pelosi since about March 2007. I never agreed with her being the Speaker of the House.
But, Karl Rove is one of the "kings" of the liars from the Bush administration.
Rove is the liar when he says that Pelosi is an "accomplice" to torture.
Bush and Cheney made the policy and got the administration lawyers to write up a bunch of memos to opine that torture was 'legal'.
NONE of the Democrats had ANY 'say' in that policy - NONE.
Whether any Democrats knew about it is one thing, but Bush and his administration did what THEY wanted to and didn't ask for or listen to ANYTHING any Democrats had to say about it.
The Bush administration willfully violated federal law and the Constitution. Regardless of what any Democrats knew when, they could do NOTHING about it because the Republicans controlled Congress and wouldn't allow any real investigations to occur.-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned4 Replies
-
50%
Hhussk7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush and Cheney made the policy and got the administration lawyers to write up a bunch of memos to opine that torture was 'legal'.
Reply
Please provide the list, or testimony, of a lawyer that was coerced into writing a bunch of memos legally justifying torture.-
-
100%
bubba27 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I won't "provide" anything, with the exception of ONE article. YOU go look it up, as it was ALL OVER the NEWS several months ago and earlier this month.
Reply
Now I KNOW that you don't pay much attention to the ACTUAL truth, if you can't even remember when it all came out.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0506/p99s01-duts.htm...
-
-
-
HomerJS49Comment removed: Abusive
-
75%
injest7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Did ya see that part where she tried to play to the most stupid useful idiots in the dem party?
Reply
Pelosi today May 15 2009
“At the same time, the Bush administration was misleading the American people about the threats of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” she added. “The CIA was misleading the Congress. At the same time, the administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”
“the administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq”
Ah yes Nancy, EVIL Bush told you about those nasty WMD’s in Iraq.
She think her stupid useful idiots are to stupid to remember this!
Pelosi December 16, 1998
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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."
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm
Note: there were NO WMD’s in Iraq 1994 according to the 04 Kay report. -
75%
injest7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bubba2
Reply
“NONE of the Democrats had ANY 'say' in that policy – NONE”
Uhm dude what do you think all this is about?
Nancy’s a$$ in the ringed BECAUSE SHE IS the Dem who had input on this policy!
Did she object? NO
What did she ask? After being FULLY informed on ALL EITs?
and Mrs. Pelosi "questioned whether we were doing enough" to extract information
In other words she didn’t think simulated waterboarding was “tough enough” was “harsh enough” was “cruel enough”
BTW the head of the CIA at the time was George Tenet , Bill Clintons appointee.
Tenet was then officially appointed Director on July 11, 1997, after a unanimous confirmation vote in the Senate.-
83%
scott42617 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As much as I HATE, HATE, HATE to defend Nancy Pelosi, WTF was she supposed to do, exactly? Even if she had more knowledge than she has let on (and I have no reason to believe she actually did), at the time she was - and this is an overlooked important detail in all the reporting I've seen - the MINORITY leader in the House (Remember? At the time, both houses of Congress were overrun with war-mongering Republicans and a good number of Republican-Lite Democrats HELL-BENT on going to war with Iraq!). Was she supposed to march to the White House and voice her objections? ....Just so Vice President Cheney could turn to her and say, "F*** you, Nancy!"?
Reply
And for the record, if I had lived in the Bay area in 2006, I would have proudly cast my vote for Cindy Sheehan because - forthe longest time she was practically the ONLY one who had been pointing out what a mistake all of this was...from the moment she had to bury her own son! -
100%
bubba27 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It does NOT matter "who" was the head of the CIA.
Reply
The BUSH administration - NOT Pelosi - SET the policy and there was NO negotiation on it, period.
Nice try - it is the BUSH administration that broke the law and violated the Constitution and then LIED about it until they were CAUGHT in their lies.
-
-
56%
injest7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
mesodude
Reply
“former Senator Bob Graham (Democrat) insisted on Thursday that he too was kept in the dark about the use of waterboarding, and called the agency's records on these briefings "suspect."”
Meso, still gullible?
jezz
Considering he was in and out of the Hospital at the time for a bad ticker, 2002 till he had a heart valve replaced in early 2003, do you really think his memory will stand up to questioning?
Do you think the Dems and Congress in general would put more pressure on a guy who was already having serious heart problems?
I would guess that he was kept out of the loop, but I don’t think it was to “hide” anything from him.
I think they did that due to his medical problems at the time, and personally could you blame them?
Try a little research dude, don’t just “parrot” Huffpo
ROFLMAO! -
50%
nostalgia7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Top Pelosi Aide Learned Of Waterboarding in 2003
Reply
"I have every belief that either she or [Harman] were told waterboarding was going on. I have no doubt that the Democratic leadership on this committee in the House knew it was going on," said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (Mich.), who has been the top Republican on the intelligence panel since fall 2004.
Hoekstra, who requested the history of agency briefings of members of Congress, is also seeking notes made by the CIA during each briefing, documents that he said last week include "a very precise accounting of the substance of each briefing." He said those memos would detail "not only the specific information provided, but also the degree of bipartisan consensus that existed with respect to the programs in question."
In a letter to Hoekstra, CIA Director Leon Panetta said the classified memos describing what was said at each briefing would be available at CIA headquarters for review by congressional staff, according to an agency official.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...
So congressional staff can review the the memos describing what was discussed at the briefings
How long before what is in the memos are leaked to the press?
Pelosi is about to get buried! -
-
-
-
100%
Charlson7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The guilty always try to blame others for their crimes, it's the nature of a criminal. Rove is a little snot and has balls bigger than his brains when he calls Pelosi an accomplice. That supposes that there was a crime and others are involved.
Reply -
-
-
-
100%
bubba27 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That is such a LAME comparison that my six-year-old niece would catch it.
Reply
Obama STOPPED in Vegas to give a speech.
If they also held a fund-raising dinner, so what?
Please don't try to tell me that W never did that while he was in office.
-
-
-
-
80%
marcharmon7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To most citizens who believe in the rule of law, be they democrats or republicans, it doesn't matter what Pelosi knew or didnt know. The fact is that laws were broken. Of course laws dont matter much anymore in this country. As long as you are rich, white, or connected. Laws only apply to those who cant afford a lawyer.
Reply-
Neutral
Wolfie20077 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
march
Reply
Wrong if laws were broken then why are you and your progressive friends trying to argue now that it was illegal but didn't say a word when they were told. Actually some democrat asked if it was harsh enough. There was no law that was broken you can't find a law that was broken because it doesn't exist. Please, don't fall back on the old "torture is illegal in the United States" because the problem with that is the interrogation techniques used on three of the terrorists was not torture. Get it bozo?
-
-
-
100%
Nothing_Tangible7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
While I voted for Obama, I never liked Pelosi or Reid. If they knew about the tortures, then they are just as guilty as Bush, Cheney and the rest of the gang. I don't care who they are, ANYONE involved with the torture should be brought to justice and charged with crimes against humanity! ANYONE!!
Reply -
50%
mdanly7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As for those who try to prove how right Karl Rove is because of his high level of intelligence, a brief review of history will show that this
Reply
is a completely flawed assumption. Lenin ("Vladimir" Ulianov, not the more recent "John")
communist dictator, & director of the savage Red Terror (1918-1921)had an I.Q. of about 165. At
a similar level, the following members of the 3rd Reich, Hitler,Himmler, & Goering, were, by these objective, psychological criteria, to be considered geniuses or borderline geniuses.
The famous Puritan Preacher ('Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God') & Prsident of Yale, Jonathan Edwards, could speak 27 languages fluently & had an I.Q. that exceeded 175.
That a person may or may not be 'smarter" than a
rival has nothing to do with which one is "better," or more "truthful" Karl Rove, based on his history of lies, deceit, personal endorsement of torture & murder, is,
beyond the shadow of a doubt,an absolute monster. Nothing can be said truthfully of a similar nature about Nancy Pelosi... -
100%
adrianrobinsonm7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
WHEN IS THIS GOVERNMENT GOING TO BRING THIS BUSH CRIMINAL,
Reply
KARL ROVE, TO JUSTICE FOR THE UNSPEAKABLE CRIMES HE COMMITTED AGAINST THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AS WELL AS AGAINST ALL OF HUMANITY.
IF THESE BUSH CRIMINALS ALONG WITH EX-PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH ARE NOT BROUGHT TO JUSTICE, IT IS AS IF THE NAZI WAR CRIMINALS THAT WERE BROUGHT TO JUSTICE MIGHT HAVE ALL BEEN FOUND INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -
0%
THOMNH627 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the press conference yesterday was tough to watch, if ever there was someone lying through their teeth it was Pelosi. The press had her in their sights and took no prisoners it was great. Karl Rove is insignificant at this point, yesterdays news. Pelosi is a joke all you panty wearing lib's can Bush bash all you want but this is Obama's problem now.
Reply-
100%
mesodude7 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In your dreams. Your payoff for supporting Bush for 8 years just keeps getting more and more disgraceful by the day. This is pretty much the end of the GOP as we know it. Wow...I didn't think they'd disappear so fast after '06. Two years from now they will be extinct. RIP GOP ;-(
Reply
-
loading ...
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.