Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27

Thread: Sen. Pelosi thinks we're fucking stupid, says she didnt know about waterboarding

  1. #16
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    Was Pelosi the one who tried to screw over Jane Harman for a top NSA position and then navigated it to someone who was less qualified?
    Jane Harman is a member of Congress. No, Pelosi didn't think Harman should be House Intelligence Chair, and Harman finagled her way to the position by having a donor threaten to stop donating to the DNC unless Pelosi caved.

    Will someone correct the thread title? Nancy Pelosi isn't a senator. She's Speaker of the House, an entirely different chamber.

  2. #17
    Elite Member Cali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    citizen of the world
    Posts
    5,443

    Default

    Pelosi says members who receive classified intelligence briefings are powerless to act on them — or even discuss them with staff -- due to confidentiality requirements.

    As a consequence, some members simply skip classified briefings to avoid being "hamstrung" by requirements they keep silent on the topics discussed.
    This, I have a big problem with. The rules should be amended to allow for discussing up a chain of commend if you hear about illegal acts or violations of international law.

    In fact, I recently learned that many of the senior White House staff become commissioned officers in the military just by attaining a certain rank. So they should be granted access to the military's rules about this. I know we aren't talking about WH staff in this instance though.

  3. #18
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    The Edge of the Annex
    Posts
    5,383

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    hogan's.. heroes?

    *blinks ignorantly*
    I think Grimm you are just going to have to use this: as your pernament avatar.

  4. #19
    Elite Member MohandasKGanja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Wherever my kids are
    Posts
    34,417

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fluffy View Post
    Jane Harman is a member of Congress. No, Pelosi didn't think Harman should be House Intelligence Chair, and Harman finagled her way to the position by having a donor threaten to stop donating to the DNC unless Pelosi caved.

    Will someone correct the thread title? Nancy Pelosi isn't a senator. She's Speaker of the House, an entirely different chamber.
    I know that Harman is a member of Congress and that she was widely considered to be a better candidate to chair an intelligence position than the person that Pelosi favored. Here is a Huffington Post columnist writing about it:
    Harman on the "smarts" scale so outweighs Alcee Hastings on the Intel Committee that Pelosi runs the risk of being seen letting personal rivalries undermine competence and expertise in the Democrats' already shaky national security portfolio.

    Harman understands satellites, sensors, WMD issues, and the ways of modern warfare as well as possesses considerable facility with international affairs. She has amazing technical competence. She comes off as abrupt and self-indulgent on occasion, but I have frequently been impressed by her grasp of detail and her articulation of tough choices.

    Jane Harman is in line to Chair the House Intelligence Committee and was given back her seniority by former House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt after a failed run in the California governor race. Whether this was a correct move or not by Gephardt, it was done -- and Pelosi would be making a mistake, in my view, to undo the Gephardt commitment.

    There is another issue lurking out there -- and that is whether Harman and others marshalled a campaign via AIPAC to lobby Pelosi to stay in her job. I have no knowledge whether this occurred or whether it violated the law if it did.

  5. #20
    Elite Member Fluffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    5,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    I know that Harman is a member of Congress
    You stated that Harman was up for a position in the NSA, an entirely different branch (executive) than the legislative branch. Geez.

    Quote Originally Posted by MohandasKGanja View Post
    Was Pelosi the one who tried to screw over Jane Harman for a top NSA position and then navigated it to someone who was less qualified?

  6. #21
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,697

    Default

    Porter Goss had an editorial in the Washington Post today, and he says:

    Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience.

    Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

    -- The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

    -- We understood what the CIA was doing.

    -- We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.

    -- We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.

    -- On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

    I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues. They did not vote to stop authorizing CIA funding. And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted.

    washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines

    maybe all the botox has affected her memory........or she's a liar, and she's complicit in the torture. her and many, many others on both sides of the political aisle.



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  7. #22
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,697

    Default

    Top Pelosi Aide Learned Of Waterboarding in 2003



    A top aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi attended a CIA briefing in early 2003 in which it was made clear that waterboarding and other harsh techniques were being used in the interrogation of an alleged al-Qaeda operative, according to documents the CIA released to Congress on Thursday.

    Pelosi has insisted that she was not directly briefed by Bush administration officials that the practice was being actively employed. But Michael Sheehy, a top Pelosi aide, was present for a classified briefing that included Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), then the ranking minority member of the House intelligence committee, at which agency officials discussed the use of waterboarding on terrorism suspect Abu Zubaida.

    A Democratic source acknowledged yesterday that it is almost certain that Pelosi would have learned about the use of waterboarding from Sheehy. Pelosi herself acknowledged in a December 2007 statement that she was aware that Harman had learned of the waterboarding and had objected in a letter to the CIA's top counsel.

    "It was my understanding at that time that Congresswoman Harman filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred," Pelosi said in the Dec. 9, 2007, statement.

    Precisely what Pelosi learned in classified intelligence briefings she received on interrogations has become a flash point in the battle over the effectiveness and legality of the methods used to extract information from alleged al-Qaeda operatives in the first years after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

    Republicans have accused Pelosi and other Democrats who attended the earliest classified briefings of knowing what CIA operatives were doing and offering their support for the methods, including waterboarding. They argue that Pelosi, who served as the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee until January 2003, objected only after the use of the techniques became public several years later.

    "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.

    Although the CIA did not initiate the requests for the details of its many briefings of members of Congress, beginning in September 2002, senior officials have chafed at criticism of their interrogation activities from lawmakers who, when made aware of the programs over past years, mostly did not object. One former senior agency official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the substance of the briefings is classified, said some lawmakers, after being told of the enhanced techniques, "questioned whether we were doing enough."

    The fierce debate was sparked three weeks ago by the release of Bush-era Justice Department memos that expanded the legal guidelines for CIA agents interrogating alleged al-Qaeda operatives. The new documents released to Congress by the CIA on Thursday stated that Pelosi was briefed on the "use of" harsh interrogation techniques in September 2002, although the documents do not state that waterboarding was mentioned.

    The absence of any description in the new documents of her being briefed on waterboarding has become a critical distinction for Pelosi. She has said that briefers discussed waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques as legal options but that they never told her such methods were being used.

    "We were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used. What they did tell us is that they had some . . . Office of [Legal] Counsel opinions, that they could be used, but not that they would," she told reporters on April 23.

    A top aide reiterated that position yesterday. "The speaker was briefed only once, in September 2002," said spokesman Brendan Daly. "The briefers described these techniques, said they were legal, but said that waterboarding had not yet been used."

    Democrats contend that the issue is not what Pelosi knew and when she knew it, but the restrictive nature of the briefings during the Bush administration. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, is leading a renewed effort to expand the briefing process. In the first four years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, only the four leaders of the intelligence panels were briefed on the most sensitive issues, and they were forbidden from discussing what they learned with anyone else.

    Pelosi's only briefing came Sept. 4, 2002, a week before the first anniversary of the attacks, and included then-Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), who at the time was chairman of the intelligence committee. Along with their chief counsels, they were the first congressional officials briefed on the interrogation tactics. Pelosi left the intelligence committee in January 2003 to become the House Democratic leader, remaining one of eight lawmakers who had the highest clearances to access classified information.

    Five months after the Pelosi-Goss meeting, in briefings for the new leaders of the Senate intelligence committee, the CIA "described in considerable detail . . . how the water board was used," according to the documents released Thursday. The next day, Feb. 5, 2003, Harman received a similar briefing as Pelosi's replacement as the top House intelligence committee Democrat.

    Harman was surprised at what she learned, particularly that intelligence officials had video of the waterboarding of Abu Zubaida and were planning on destroying it. Captured in early 2002, Abu Zubaida, whose real name is Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, faced months of standard interrogations before being sent to a CIA-run facility where the harsher techniques were used.

    Harman wrote to the CIA's general counsel on Feb. 10, 2003, to question whether the methods "are consistent with the principles and policies of the United States. Have enhanced techniques been authorized and approved by the president?"

    The Washington Post reported in extensive detail on Dec. 9, 2007, about the briefings that Harman and other leaders of the intelligence committees received in the first few years of the U.S. campaign against terrorism. The day of the report, Pelosi issued the statement standing by her account that she was "briefed on techniques the administration was considering using in the future" and adding that she "concurred" with Harman's protest of the tactics.

    Neither Pelosi nor her staff would comment on how she learned of the techniques she now considers torture, and Harman said in an interview that she "did not recall" discussing the issue with Pelosi. Sheehy was Pelosi's top aide on the intelligence committee when she served as the ranking Democrat on that panel, and he remained her top national security aide until he left the speaker's office this year.
    Pelosi never filed any official letter of protest, but some lawmakers said such objections to the Bush administration at that time were pointless.

    "I felt that it was minimally responsive," Harman said of the CIA's response to her February 2003 letter. "It didn't address the issue I asked."

    A bipartisan group of lawmakers says that the restrictions placed on the intelligence committee leaders -- the "Gang of Four," which included the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate panels -- limited any oversight role Congress could play. In the fall of 2005, a few other congressional leaders, including those that controlled the CIA's budget, were briefed on interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. The full House and Senate intelligence committees were not briefed on the matter until September 2006, four years after the initial Pelosi briefing.

    Unless the full committee is aware of such issues, Feinstein said in an interview, Congress has no power to act. "I believe in it very strongly, no equivocation at all. There must be notification for all committee members," Feinstein said.

    But some Republicans said Democrats are now looking to cover themselves politically for not objecting to a process that their liberal supporters oppose. "There is a protocol for who gets briefed, depending on the issue," said House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio). "It's an open forum."

    Top Pelosi Aide Learned of Waterboarding in 2003



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  8. #23
    Elite Member nana55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dreaming about being on a lake in Ontario
    Posts
    4,084

    Default

    Pelosi is my least favorite democrat. She looks like she sleeps with a hangar in her mouth so she can have a permanent(fake) smile on her face all day.
    If I can't be a good example, then let me be a horrible warning.

  9. #24
    Elite Member darksithbunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,965

    Default

    So is anybody doing anything about it?

  10. #25
    Elite Member cynic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6,435

    Default

    .....as Witchcurlgirl said....Pelosi will have some more botox so that she doesn't look worried about it....what ELSE do you want?.......truth and responsiblity from politicians?.....

  11. #26
    Elite Member witchcurlgirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Acerbia
    Posts
    34,697

    Default

    Pelosi defense: couldn't object in '03

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi learned in early 2003 that the Bush administration was waterboarding terror detainees but didn’t protest directly out of respect for “appropriate” legislative channels, a person familiar with the situation said Monday.

    The Pelosi camp’s version of events is intended to answer two key questions posed by her critics: When, precisely, did she first learn about waterboarding? And why didn’t she do more to stop it?

    Pelosi has disputed a CIA document, released last week, that shows she was briefed in September 2002 on the “particular” interrogation techniques the United States had used on Al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah. Pelosi has said she was told then only that the Bush administration was considering using certain techniques in the future — and that it had the legal authority to do so.

    But there’s no dispute that on Feb. 4, 2003 — five months after Pelosi’s September meeting — CIA officials briefed Pelosi aide Michael Sheehy and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, on the specific techniques that had been used on Zubaydah — including waterboarding.

    Harman was so alarmed by what she had heard, she drafted a short letter to the CIA’s general counsel to express “profound” concerns with the tactic — going so far as to ask if waterboarding had been personally “approved by the president.”

    According to the Pelosi confidant, Sheehy told Pelosi about the briefing — and later informed Pelosi, the newly elected minority leader, that Harman was drafting a protest letter. Pelosi told Sheehy to tell Harman that she agreed with the letter, the Pelosi insider said. But she did not ask to be listed as a signatory on the letter, the source said, and there is no reference to her in it.

    Pelosi and Harman, sometimes bitter rivals, have still not discussed the controversy since it broke three weeks ago, according to Democratic insiders.

    Sheehy has not responded to several calls and e-mails seeking comment on what he told Pelosi during this period. But the Pelosi confidant — who spoke to POLITICO on the condition of anonymity — insisted that Pelosi did all that she could have done.
    “She felt that the appropriate response was the letter from Harman, because Jane was the one who was briefed,” said the person. Pelosi “never got briefed on it personally, and when Harman got a ‘no response’ from the CIA, there was nothing more that could be done.”

    Republicans aren’t buying it.

    “If Nancy was so concerned about the waterboarding, why did she let someone else write the letter?” asked Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking Republican on the intelligence committee. “If she was so upset, why did she let someone else raise objections?”

    Hoekstra has asked the CIA for documents on its congressional briefings, and he told POLITICO Monday that he has made a request for e-mails from agency staffers detailing their interactions with Pelosi and other House and Senate members. Steve Elmendorf, who served as chief of staff to former Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), said that coming so soon after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it would have been difficult politically for Pelosi to do more to protest interrogation techniques the Bush administration was using.

    “You have to remember, in the 2002 period, the whole atmospherics, it was all about scaring people every day,” said Elmendorf. “People were legitimately concerned that we were going to be attacked again, and there was a constant drumbeat coming from the Bush administration of, ‘Bad things could happen, bad things could happen.’ Nobody wants it to happen on their watch.”

    Republicans have found a rare avenue of attack against Pelosi over the waterboarding briefing, at a time when the speaker is ramming through paradigm-shifting legislative proposals on behalf of the Obama administration. That grilling is likely to continue today when the speaker returns from a grueling weekend trip to Baghdad.

    Still, Democrats are rallying to the speaker — and questioning the accuracy of the CIA’s description of its congressional briefings.

    An aide to former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) took issue Monday with the entry for a Feb. 4, 2003, briefing in which a Rockefeller staffer was reportedly told “how the water board was used.”

    “We are not in a position to vouch for the accuracy of the document,” a Rockefeller spokeswoman said. He “has repeatedly stated he was not told critical information that would have cast significant doubt on the program’s legality and effectiveness.”

    Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time Pelosi was briefed, told The Washington Post’s PlumLine blog that he wasn’t told of waterboarding then, either — despite a Sept. 27, 2002, briefing entry indicating he was given details of Zubaydah’s interrogation.

    “I do not have any recollection of being briefed on waterboarding or other forms of extraordinary interrogation techniques, or Abu Zubaydah being subjected to them,” said Graham, adding: “Something as unexpected and dramatic as that would be the kind of thing that you would normally expect to recall even years later.”

    Even so, Democratic insiders acknowledge that Pelosi has not handled the media furor surrounding the interrogation briefings — and what she was told and when — in a timely or aggressive manner.

    “I don’t know whether the story is overplayed or they’re misjudging it,” said a Democratic leadership aide. “I don’t know, maybe they haven’t been aggressive enough.”

    This aide added: “I think they’re good at walking and chewing gum — that’s not the problem. I don’t think they recognized that this issue has the legs that it does.”

    Pelosi defense: couldn't object in '03 - Glenn Thrush and John Bresnahan - POLITICO.com

    first she didn't know. then she knew, but was under the impression that they might be used. then she knew they were being used but couldn't object.

    i don't mind lies....but bad lies are just sad.



    All of God's children are not beautiful. Most of God's children are, in fact, barely presentable.


    If I wanted the government in my womb I'd fuck a Senator

  12. #27
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,359

    Default

    KICK HER DUMBFUCK ASS OUT

    so tired of her
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 39
    Last Post: December 17th, 2009, 09:15 AM
  2. This just in: Sarah Palin is fucking stupid
    By Grimmlok in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: October 12th, 2008, 06:36 PM
  3. Amusement park simulates waterboarding torture
    By ariesallover in forum News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: August 10th, 2008, 11:26 PM
  4. Replies: 25
    Last Post: May 29th, 2008, 12:18 PM
  5. Replies: 55
    Last Post: January 21st, 2008, 03:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •