I’m a bit worried about the wingnuts. I just don’t think they are sufficiently knowledgeable of history or sophisticated enough about the ways of the world to hold public office.
John Boehner "could not imagine intelligence officials lying to Congress."
And Kit Bond says "I think it is outrageous for the speaker to call our terror fighters liars."
Joe Lieberman parses his words a bit more carefully — every once in a while he has to go back to Connecticut and face constituents who don’t view flaying liberals as a strict virtue, and think lying your face off gets you bonus points. But he "totally disagrees" with Pelosi.
And now, there’s Newt Gingrich, who doesn’t parse quite as much:
I think this is the most despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort I’ve seen in my lifetime. She is a trivial politician, viciously using partisanship for the narrowest of purposes, and she dishonors the Congress by her behavior. Speaker Pelosi’s the big loser, because she either comes across as incompetent, or dishonest. Those are the only two defenses.
But let’s review:
1. Abu Zubaydah waterboarded for a month in August, 2002.
2. Nancy Pelosi, Porter Goss and Bob Graham briefed by the CIA in September 2002:
- Pelosi says the only time waterboarding was mentioned was when the CIA said it was not being used, and that she was not informed that Abu Zubaydah had been waterboarded.
- Goss "refutes" Pelosi by saying that he was "slack jawed" to read Pelosi’s claim that "waterboarding" was never mentioned (she didn’t), or that the CIA didn’t imply that the technique would "actually be employed." He specifically never says that they were told Zubaydah had already been waterboarded.
- Bob Graham’s notes indicate the CIA just made up two briefings that never occured. He also says that when he was briefed, there were staff members present, and procedure dictates that they would not have been anyone there but "authorized personnel" if "sensitive programs" such as waterboarding were being discused.
So, Pelosi’s not the only one who refutes the CIA’s claims — both Porter Goss and Bob Graham back her up.
As Spencer notes, the right-wing demagogues on their fainting couches seem to be unfamiliar with the case of Richard Helms, the CIA intelligence officer convicted of lying to congress in 1977. I’m worried that with their rose-colored glasses, people like Bond, Lieberman and Boehner just don’t have an appropriately skeptical view of human nature to be making decisions about things as critical to our national safety as terrorism.
Related posts:
- In April 2003, after Waterboarding Him 183 Times, the CIA Admitted KSM Was Lying to Them
- Victory is Mine! Time’s Swampland Says Pelosi was Right
- Was Porter Goss Briefed on Things Pelosi and Harman Weren’t?
- Pelosi Fundraiser at UnitedHealth Lobbyist’s Home
- LATE NIGHT: Boxer’s GOP Opponent Running Against… Scary Pelosi





Spotlight








Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

Thanks Jane!
At least one of our employees is lying. I would seriously have to consider disciplinary action up to and terminating someone if this happened on my watch under my supervision.
CIA lie? Republicans can’t imagine such a thing. Can you?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..03730.html
Well, it’s not a lie, “as they see it.” Is it?
best smackdown to date of their latest, “the cia wouldn’t lie to us” meme
thanx for the post jane
I want to point out that Nancy had her ground work laid before her by Marcy wheeler
if Marcy hadn’t pointed out the documented deception in the cia’s version of events pelosi would have had her work cut out for herself proving her point
now she can say what she’s saying without any work at all
she owes a huge debt to the big wheel at the lake and I sure hope she knows it
Is there anyone besides FDL covering Nancy’s backside?
Is it too much to hope that Nancy is a fire pup? Hope she donates to Marcy’s investigative fund.
Who do I believe? Mini-Me(aka Huckleberry)? Or Nancy? Would Lieberman want to accuse Bob Graham of lying? Because Lieberman would have to answer this:
http://jamesfallows.theatlanti…..am_how.php
If Hillary had listened to Graham(who is no DFH), she’d be President today. But she didn’t, so she isn’t. Graham(Bob .. not Mini-Me) is right here, I have little doubt.
EPU’d:
Lawrence O Donnell inserted it hard, dry and sideways yesterday when he reminded some torture apologist – the CIA lied to Chairman Barry Goldwater in 1984 about the mining of Nicaraguan harbors
Senator Moynihan:
Congressional Record
Has Nancy wanted any backing? It’s just like Chris Dodd. For whatever reason, they don’t know what hit them until it is too late(Basically, they can’t believe their own party will throw them under the bus .. or try to anyway).
as far as I am concerned Nancy threw the country under the bus by ignoring the crimes of bushco
this is now coming back to bite her and while I will defend the instances of false accusation I still hold her to account for the damage done under her watch
But why in the world would the Party want to? We need Madam Speaker.
Digby
anyone doubting the Oracle of Santa Monica should put on their hazmat suits and take a tour through the regurgitated cocktail weenie slop that is passing for TradMed “analysis”
Nancy Pelosi’s presser yesterday was better than expected, but she would have been more effective if she had emphasized the timeline more.
She should have said,”AB was waterboarded 83 times in August, 2002. I was first briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques the following month, in September, 2002. The CIA told me then that waterboarding had not been used. Even if the CIA had told me the truth at that time, I could not have prevented waterboarding that had already occurred.”
What I’m not clear on is let’s say Pelosi was given information about torture. What should she and could she have done about it? With all this focus on the question of whether some Democrats knew what was happening, the idea that tacitly follows is that they endorsed it unless they complained about it. Could have have raised this issue in any way? I haven’t seen that explained anywhere.
Wasn’t the whole Iran/Contra affair a huge CIA lie from beginning to end? With characters like E Howard Hunt in their organization, how can there be any doubt that they would lie to Congress or anyone else!
I am no fan of Nancy. However, forced to pick the truth teller in the group mentioned (Nancy, Joe the Weasel, Kit Bond, Boner and Porter Goss) I’m goin with Nancy.
Thanks, Jane.
Pitiful excuses for “journalism” by the traditional media. Apparently, the “Today” show (lauer, k.o’donnell) are incredulous that the CIA would lie as well.
I asked this yesterday: have any of the torture apologists or pundits ever explained why waterboarding is ok now, but was torture when practiced by other countries or that Texas sheriff? I’ve never heard anyone ask that question of those claiming “waterboarding isn’t torture”
Well I’m no fan of Nancy Pelosi. She’s been a rotten leader. BUT…she is not responsible for the criminal torture policies of Dick Cheney, et. al.
hey there scooter boy !
working a double, call before you leave work in case I’m stuck there
Hoekstra says there are all kinds of waterboarding. Need anything more be said?
I disagree with bashing Pelosi for not impeaching Bush. If she had allowed it and it went forward what would have happened in the Senate? Bush would have gotten off. From that point forward he would have been the victim of partisan politics. I wonder how things would be going under President McShame?
Hope it goes fast and easy.
They’re counting on their shouting to drown out the facts. And dates.
Jane, do you have any sense that Pelosi gone to Obama for back up yet?
You’re assuming that a full airing of all of W’s misdeeds wouldn’t have changed public opinion, and therefore narrowed the pols options.
I think this show is all about making everybody forget that dick told Face the Nation last Sunday that he and georgie ordered torture. Plain and simple.
just sayin.
They’re spies! Lying is in their job description. Oy.
I agree with this statement. I’m really not keen on defending her but because the Republicans leveling these charges are such sewage, I will.
At least two people are advocating for Nancy Pelosi:
(1) Greg Sargent at the Washington Post is the one that interviewed Bob Graham, who said the CIA also lied to him; http://theplumline.whorunsgov……/#comments
(2) Matthew Ygliesas states that he always tries to talk up the virtues of Nancy Pelosi because one shudders to consider the alternatives. http://yglesias.thinkprogress……e-name.php
Anyway, I clearly remember the GOP telling us that the CIA was lying: (1) when they released the 2007 Iran NIE stating that Iran had stopped their nuclear weapons program, and (2) when they stated that Valerie Plame was a covert agent.
lemme see
waterboarding to near death
waterboarding to death
yup, he’s correct
I wonder the same thing, but whay should she have to ask?
IMO the worst decision of the Bush era was not starting impeachment. Had all the Bush crimes been investigated years ago, R’s would be in an even worse position today than they already are. And we could have changed policies a couple years earlier, saving lives.
Jane, you’re too generous. The problem is they aren’t sophisticated enough to read a calendar.
GOP telling us that the CIA was lying: (1) when they released the 2007 Iran NIE stating that Iran had stopped their nuclear weapons program, and (2) when they stated that Valerie Plame was a covert agent.
excellent.
I’m with you on that. Nan could have better drawn attention to the diversionary tactics of Cheney by more clearly stating her case.
What’s significant about waterboarding in the context of “enhanced interrogation methods,” of which Pelosi was apparently apprised by her own account?
I understand that this most recent shiny object attracting the attention of the gumbahs of the Fourth Estate is entirely political, but the larger legal questions are getting lost in the crosstalk.
Given the state of the press, then and now, I think that’s a pretty safe assumption. Deck was stacked too far to the right for anything good to come out of it. That was Pelosi’s call, and for all I know she was right. Too much rot for the system to work as it should.
That, or their calendars all read “1980.”
disagree foothill
the evidence abounds and is brutal, they would have been forced to impeach or face election repercussions
and cheney/bush would never have gone before the bar, they’re cowards
and even in worst case where you are correct, the crimes would be set to paper and historically recorded for posterity
there was a no loose situation impeaching bushco and I hold her to account for all that happened since she took it off the table
the very notion of “taking it off the table” allowed bushco to do much more then if the threat stood looming
anyone who thinks his job as part of the new media – or any other kind of media – includes the right to talk up (or talk down) anyone based on their own judgement is involved in manipulation and not in informing. if matt thinks that the truth as he knows it is convincing, then he should share that and the reasons why.
at least he’s now being honest about what he’s doing. so i give him points for that. (haven’t read the link though, just doing by what you write)
but this is exactly one of the reasons why the accusations of “liberal intellectual elitism” and similar ring true. and anyone who thinks they have the right to do someone else’s thinking for them is not, in my book, to be trusted.
LOL!
Liberman’s “CIA told the truth as they saw it”. There aren’t enough epithets to dump on this conniving fool.
Lawrence Wilkerson guest bloogged at http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/: The Truth About Richard Bruce Cheney
Exactly. Excellent, Jane.
You should probably read Matt’s post as it lays bare the likely motivation behind the bipartisan smearing of Pelosi. In addition, Matt Ygliesas is an opinion pundit and has every right to point out the virtues of Pelosi. I wish more people would do it.
Jane!
I, too, question whether the rank and file Wingnuts have the wits to understand the subtlety of the facts as we’ve come to know them, so far.
However, the storyline does appear to be simplifying today. Wilkerson has moved the lede forward to “Bush Waterboarded in April/May ‘02 – Looking for Iraq-Al Qaeda links – Long Before Getting Any Legal Opinions or Properly Informing Congress.”
So, just when the dull Goopers are starting to catch-on to Bush Waterboarding Zubaydah on the Basis of Bybee’s Sordid Word-Twisting – Wilkerson is now saying: Forget about having a Legal Opinion, he Waterboarded – Torture and a War Crime – Months Earlier On His Own Authority, without informing Congress.
The Monsters are being called out!
This should be an interesting day…
Thanks for All that you do to Fight Injustice!
wow, page no longer available
that’s amazing
To add to what I just said: Boehner and Bond are nothing but hypocritical nincompoops.
It would be nice to think that the opposition actually stood for something–other than defending rank torture.
As part of Obama’s debt reduction program, the CIA needs to be reorganized
into oblivion, or eliminated through Executive Order.
Try this link.
honest opinions are all good with me. my problem is when someone tries to influence other people’s opinions by intentional selective use of what is known. i’m sorry if my comment wasn’t clear on that.
As I said yesterday, if they abolished the CIA, the prez would have to reinvent it to give him the excuses he needs to do whatever he wants.
You are way too kind.
I just got there from the link at HuffPo: http://www.thewashingtonnote.c…..uth_about/
OR http://www.thewashingtonnote.c…..uth_about/
These seem to work for me!!
Seconded. I’m for the DoD, in its entirety, being decommissioned, as well.
Yes, and the goober-pooblicans also are still having vapors over the Church Committee and Watergate/’What Was Done To Nixon’. Darth Cheney and his philosophy of Imperial Executive Power ran the CIA as another fiefdom in the portfolio of agencies he co-opted. They did as they were told, being the most closely aligned with the Bush Family (hell, the building is the GHW Bush intel center or some such shit).
Don’t look for morality in the halls of the CIA, it’s to be found within each employee (or not), but not within the culture of the organization. Thanks for that, bunnypants… I don’t think it used to be that way.
As expected and annoying as all the misleading bluster is, what’s more important is that the available facts of the matter support Pelosi.
Bluster and willfull ignornace shift and fade with time, the facts don’t.
Most seem to be transplants from the military, going way back. In its infancy, it tried to ape the posh British counterpart, but lacked the peerage to justify the mode.
Ah. But what Matt Yglesias is doing is pointing out a fact that is obscure to many. He is introducing additional facts into the debate and thus shines a bright light on the motives of those Democrats, such as Lieberman and Hoyer, hopping on the smear Pelosi train.
“I think this is the most despicable, dishonest and vicious political effort I’ve seen in my lifetime.”
This little explosion is Newt’s way of saying that he’s not looking forward to the investigations that absolutely must take place now.
Kaboom! It’s blowing up in their faces.
Christy has a new post up for our perusal: “OLC: Is Ben Nelson Using Dawn Johnsen’s Nomination To Fish For A Prize?”
In Cheney’s recent “interview”-when asked about whether Pelosi was fully briefed about prisoner interrogations, Cheney hedged and briefly touched on “enhanced interrogation”. Why is this not being brought up?
Bond is my Senator. I had to write him tell him to apologize to Pelosi. Won’t do any good, but I was annoyed.
What–the CIA says its not “their policy” to mislead congress.
Either they can’t keep dates right, they are lying, or they were directed to lie.
PS
“Terror fighter” is a loser of a term. Hope they keep it up.
look, i don’t know how to say this any clearer – i’m not objecting to matt’s opinions, or his current post. i object to his past of “talking up” pelosi for political reasons (he dislikes the alternatives) without at that time being honest about what he was doing.
i don’t like being spun. i think it’s intellectually dishonest. and i especially resent it when the spinning feeds my confirmation biases because they are so hard to fight against.
it’s “not my policy” to jay walk but I do it at times for sure
Keep in mind the intelligence community it appears considers the POTUS as included in “need to know”.
For example sucky Bush 1 knew all about “UFO’s” as I am sure Dick did, but Bill Clinton and other DEMOCRATIC POTUS have noted they have asked and will not be told.
Great that the government can keep a shadow Rethug government running.
What was Nancy Pelosi supposed to do? She was sworn to secrecy. Note that Bob Graham explains that he was not allowed to even make notes on the substance of the one (of four claimed) CIA briefing that he attended.
This finger-pointing at Pelosi is ridiculous. She is not guilty of any criminal conduct. Check the definitions on accomplice and complicity and accessory after the fact. This whole hullabaloo is just ridiculous Republican distraction techniques. It’s pure Rove — Remember that guy who never testified under oath to Congress himself. This is an utter waste of time.
Indict Bush and Cheney. That is the way to find out what happened. How dare they try to implicate Pelosi. Yes, she should have impeached Bush, but had she tried, the same people who are now complaining that she was complicit would have accused her of partisan politics. Stop this now.
It is those who point the finger at Pelosi who aiding and abetting character assassination and protecting torturers.