NationStates Jolt Archive

Those of us on the political right, here, are loving this development. Nancy Pelosi claims the CIA is lying about info that she knew, or didn't know, about enhanced interrogation going on at Gitmo. This woman, not one of my favorite political personalities, has been screaming for Bush Administration officials and CIA operatives of that time to be investigated by Special Independent Council. Now, I can't suppress a smile when I think of, "What did she know and when did she know it?"

Plus, since this is the CIA, who have incredible surveilance and record keeping abilities, who no lefty really trusts even though they currently run it, does she think thay can't manufacture proof if they want to?

Who wins?

What did she know and when did she know it?

She sounds crazy.

well here's the thing...

back when the last administration was trying to get out of informing congress about its sketchy activities they would tell the armed services committee (or whatever committee it really is) that they couldnt ask about certain programs because it came under intelligence, and the intelligence committee that it came under armed services.

in order to keep the congress from knowing the full story.

so do i think that the CIA under bush would try to obfuscate the truth when informing the necessary members of congress? yes i do.

am i certain of it? not by a long shot.

Those of us on the political right, here, are loving this development... I can't suppress a smile when I think of, "What did she know and when did she know it?"
It's a sad day when you're enjoying the possibility that an elected representative concealed knowledge of torture.

Yaaay for nonsensical partisanship!

unfortunately for the cia, they tried the same trick on bob graham, who keeps like a play-by-play journal of his entire life. he claims the cia is lying about the very existence of some briefings they claim they gave him (http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/05/the_cia_vs_sen_bob_graham_how.php), and the cia has declined to comment about it. this fairly conclusively shows the cia is in fact just making shit up and engaging in a rather half-assed cover up.

better question - why the fuck would anyone ever believe anything the cia says? their job is to lie professionally, and their interests and ours will only incidentally ever align.

also, the whole "pelosi knew!!!!" complaint seems sort of hollow. she's on board with the truth commission idea anyways, and nobody wants complicit dems to be exempt from their justly deserved punishments, should anything come up in the course of convicting the entire bush admin for the numerous felonies, war crimes, and crimes against humanity they have publicly admitted committing on national teevee, those we already know they did but that they have been less free about talking up, and those that have yet to surface. so basically, sfw?

There are two possibilities:
(1) The CIA leader knew they were using waterboarding and didn't prevent it. That would mean he should be fired for his scandalous conflict.
(2) The CIA did NOT know about the waterboarding. That would mean he's incompetent and needs to be replaced.

C'mon, people -- it's not rocket science.

There are two possibilities:
(1) The CIA leader knew they were using waterboarding and didn't prevent it. That would mean he should be fired for his scandalous conflict.
(2) The CIA did NOT know about the waterboarding. That would mean he's incompetent and needs to be replaced.

C'mon, people -- it's not rocket science.
of course the head of the cia knew. there is no doubt of that. none.

it may turn out that the cia's obfuscation to mrs pelosi is that THEY were not waterboarding anyone because they had hired it out to private contractors. so they didnt LIE to mrs pelosi, they just mislead her.

which, one hopes, will turn out to be illegal enough to get someone prosecuted for it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/30762226#30762226

well now Nancy Pelosi is admitting she did know.
The Obama administration is seems to be trying to steer us away from a very public investigation.
The republicans finally got bipartisan and are helping with that push as well.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/vp/30762226#30762226

well now Nancy Pelosi is admitting she did know.
The Obama administration is seems to be trying to steer us away from a very public investigation.
The republicans finally got bipartisan and are helping with that push as well.
she knew something at some time. that doesnt mean that she wasnt lied to and that the CIA isnt lying now.

and i dont care. if she has come complicity in this, she needs to answer for it just like anyone else. having democrats implicated makes it less open to a "witch hunt" charge.

she knew something at some time. that doesnt mean that she wasnt lied to and that the CIA isnt lying now.

and i dont care. if she has come complicity in this, she needs to answer for it just like anyone else. having democrats implicated makes it less open to a "witch hunt" charge.

Having the democrats involved means both sides will work together to cover it up.
Also I wonder how many other democrats were briefed over this.
I'd look closely at senators and former senators.

Having the democrats involved means both sides will work together to cover it up.
Also I wonder how many other democrats were briefed over this.
I'd look closely at senators and former senators.
it doesnt matter.

being briefed and not breaking the law by blowing the whistle isnt a chargeable offense.

it doesnt matter.

being briefed and not breaking the law by blowing the whistle isnt a chargeable offense.

Yeah its more of a cost them an election type of offense.

Having the democrats involved means both sides will work together to cover it up.

except that pelosi is currently part of the group right now calling for a truth commission. which means that she would be hard pressed to do anything about blocking independent prosecutors/commissions being appointed to investigate everything. this is where it all breaks down. she could only cover things up so long as there is no independent investigation done. it's not like she couldn't just follow obama's lead of pretending that the past is past. why is she undermining her own cover up?

except that pelosi is currently part of the group right now calling for a truth commission. which means that she would be hard pressed to do anything about blocking independent prosecutors/commissions being appointed to investigate everything. this is where it all breaks down. she could only cover things up so long as there is no independent investigation done. it's not like she couldn't just follow obama's lead of pretending that the past is past. why is she undermining her own cover up?

My guess, she was hoping by being the most proactive in investigating the matter she would shift attention off of herself.
As for Obama. He was not a Senator until 2005, he is likely clean of this mess.
As a clean new person he can call for lets just move on without it insinuating he is covering his own ass. Older senators have at least the appearance of more to hide.

Yeah its more of a cost them an election type of offense.
there is that potential. im sure they are furiously polling to see how their constituents feel about the various possibilities.

keep in mind that i certainly dont put anything past mrs pelosi. she may well have been completely briefed and may now be trying very hard to cover it up.

but i do feel that it is equally likely that the CIA didnt brief ANYONE in congress (republicans as well as democrats) on the full extent of what was being done to detainees.

and since they are STILL pretending that the abu ghraib problems were done by rogue soldiers on a sadistic streak, i feel that i have good reason to not believe anything the cia says.

there is that potential. im sure they are furiously polling to see how their constituents feel about the various possibilities.


keep in mind that i certainly dont put anything past mrs pelosi. she may well have been completely briefed and may now be trying very hard to cover it up.

but i do feel that it is equally likely that the CIA didnt brief ANYONE in congress (republicans as well as democrats) on the full extent of what was being done to detainees.



The thing is the republicans are saying yes they were briefed.
The reason for that is the republican base is likely to no care or even approve of the use of those means.
Where as the democratic base is likely to to pitch a fit.
It is the real reason the Obama administration wants to back away form this, it throws too many unknowns into the 2010 election.

The thing is the republicans are saying yes they were briefed.
The reason for that is the republican base is likely to no care or even approve of the use of those means.
Where as the democratic base is likely to to pitch a fit.
It is the real reason the Obama administration wants to back away form this, it throws too many unknowns into the 2010 election.
which republican is saying that he was told in 2002-3 that the cia was waterboarding high value detainees?

oh there is little chance of this getting more republicans elected. obama doesnt want this to derail his amazingly ambitious agenda.

which republican is saying that he was told in 2002-3 that the cia was waterboarding high value detainees?

oh there is little chance of this getting more republicans elected. obama doesnt want this to derail his amazingly ambitious agenda.

Not certain which it was mentioned in the video I linked.

There is little chance right now, under the current situation.
Let the democrat's base lose energy because their leadership was shown to be complacent in torture. And the election becomes a lot more interesting.

Got to hand it to bush though he could have helped his party by declassifying these documents just before the election but chose not to.

Not certain which it was mentioned in the video I linked.

There is little chance right now, under the current situation.
Let the democrat's base lose energy because their leadership was shown to be complacent in torture. And the election becomes a lot more interesting.

Got to hand it to bush though he could have helped his party by declassifying these documents just before the election but chose not to.
i think mr bush must have been drunk every day from the election on...(not unlike certain students after finals end, eh?) there are several things that he ought to have done to protect the party and the various members of his administration.

I wonder. if it was some Republican that this was centered around and not a Democrat, would the arguments here still be the same?

i think mr bush must have been drunk every day from the election on...(not unlike certain students after finals end, eh?) there are several things that he ought to have done to protect the party and the various members of his administration.

you're assuming Bush's main focus was the Republican Party.

i think mr bush must have been drunk every day from the election on...(not unlike certain students after finals end, eh?) there are several things that he ought to have done to protect the party and the various members of his administration.

things like hand out pardons like candy?

Or release classified documents that show the opposing party was also complacent in torture jsut before the election?

The first one I am surprised about, I was expecting it. Bush might have been more conflicted then I thought.

The second one makes sense it might have endangered soldier's lives.

I wonder. if it was some Republican that this was centered around and not a Democrat, would the arguments here still be the same?

I suspect there would be rope involved if that were the case.

I wonder. if it was some Republican that this was centered around and not a Democrat, would the arguments here still be the same?
if it were a republican we would still be hearing the "it wasnt torture", "it was justified" and "it was only a few bad apples" thing. mrs pelosi is giving them the opportunity to warn the democrats that they will be dragged down too if they keep pushing.

things like hand out pardons like candy?

Or release classified documents that show the opposing party was also complacent in torture jsut before the election?

The first one I am surprised about, I was expecting it. Bush might have been more conflicted then I thought.

The second one makes sense it might have endangered soldier's lives.
mostly the handing out pardons thing.

mr rove is testifying for the special prosecutor today about whether or not he and others lied in previous investigations of the bush administration. he has so many sketchy things on his record that leaving him unpardoned might mean he ends up in prison.

mostly the handing out pardons thing.

mr rove is testifying for the special prosecutor today about whether or not he and others lied in previous investigations of the bush administration. he has so many sketchy things on his record that leaving him unpardoned might mean he ends up in prison.

As Oliver North has pointed out depends on how much classified information you know.

As Oliver North has pointed out depends on how much classified information you know.
ollie got a pardon from reagan.

ollie got a pardon from reagan.

Actually he was tried.

ohn D. Cline was a defense attorney for Oliver North and successfully used graymail to dismiss the most serious charges against North (see Iran-Contra Affair). "Among his detractors, Cline is what is known as a "graymail" specialist"

He flooded the court with over 1 million pages of classified documents he wanted to use in his defense. The result was all the serious charges were dropped. He was convicted for lying to congress and destroying documents.
3 years suspended sentence, which later the ACLU got over turned.

Actually he was tried.

He flooded the court with over 1 million pages of classified documents he wanted to use in his defense. The result was all the serious charges were dropped. He was convicted for lying to congress and destroying documents.
3 years suspended sentence, which later the ACLU got over turned.
well then who did reagan pardon?

ahhh i see it was bush 1 who pardoned iran-contra guys (but not ollie)

well then who did reagan pardon?

Reagan fired north and set him up for trial. A true Machiavellian move, if Nixon had done the same thing he would not have been impeached.

Reagan fired north and set him up for trial. A true Machiavellian move, if Nixon had done the same thing he would not have been impeached.
nixon was too afraid that if he didnt support his men they would turn on him

nixon was too afraid that if he didnt support his men they would turn on him

Maybe or he had that idea a leader should cover for his men.

Maybe or he had that idea a leader should cover for his men.
possible

possible

Moral of the story is if you know of the existence of several thousand classified documents you can not be convicted.

Moral of the story is if you know of the existence of several thousand classified documents you can not be convicted.
maybe.

but i suspect that mr rove has made too many enemies to get off that easily.

maybe.

but i suspect that mr rove has made too many enemies to get off that easily.

My understanding was that all of Congress was After Mr. North.

My understanding was that all of Congress was After Mr. North.
as well they should have been, the treasonous, subversive piece of shit!

Why do we have two threads on the same topic?

Why do we have two threads on the same topic?

Backstitching. :D

My guess, she was hoping by being the most proactive in investigating the matter she would shift attention off of herself.

this seems too clever by half for non-obama democrats

Why do we have two threads on the same topic?
I put in a poll. :p

My understanding was that all of Congress was After Mr. North.
Yeah, but they gave him immunity before they knew what he was going to say. That's how his conviction was overturned in court.

I put in a poll. :p

Yeah, but they gave him immunity before they knew what he was going to say. That's how his conviction was overturned in court.

Yeah but that immunity was for testimony given to congress.
The conviction was for lying to congress during that testimony.