Who is Fibbing to Whom?

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appears before reporters.

Is Nancy correct in asserting that the CIA were not honest with her?

More here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22550.html

iggy donnelly


Filed under Crimes, Enhanced Interrogations, Life Lessons, Republicans, torture, U. S. Supreme Court, Wingnuts!, Woman Power

19 responses to “Who is Fibbing to Whom?

  1. I’m still waiting (with the rest of the country) for Senator Roberts to tell what he knows. Since he couldn’t do it as head of the Senate Select Intelligence Committee, then quit and ran so he could avoid the release of the Phase II report, maybe now that he has the chance to smear a Democratic rival he will be forthcoming? I have a feeling he still won’t be able to — as he knows things further damaging to bushco.

  2. “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.”

    continue reading at:

  3. You know what bothers me about all this?
    Why are we even talking about Pelosi?
    Not us, the media!
    I mean, we have some terrible war crimes to investigate. Let’s do it.

    Also, the CIA and neocons pointing the finger at her just confirms in my mind that these things are crimes.

    It’s like a bunch of kids who got caught in the cookie jar.
    “Nancy saw us take the cookies, why isn’t she in trouble?”

    • jammer5

      That’s the whole point, sek. Divert attention away from what’s really going on. It’s the small minded bully blaming the skinny kid when he gets his ass kicked. Whether or not Polosi’s lying will eventually come out. But in this country, a person is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. But ask that of the Republican party and you will get, “What, you trying to preempt my constitutional right to free speech?”

      Truth has taken a back seat to gossip, lies and innuendo on the beltway, and when someone stands against it, they’re branded as liars. Look at Fox: they’re calling for teabag 2.0. For what? To keep the lies going? To keep the cons fed their respective helpings of koolaide?

      It makes me of a mind we have to stand up to the trash talking, and go on the offense. Start asking the questions that need to be asked, and shuffle the con bs aside. What’s going on now is NOT the country I know and love.

  4. Bad Biker

    The CIA is less than honest? No way. The have such a stellar reputation for being “above board.”

    (Make your own joke with that one.)

    • lilacluvr

      Especially since the FBI apparently backed off immediately regarding that waterboarding policy.

  5. frigginloon

    Can you hear the sound of paper shredders Clarice?

  6. lilacluvr

    If the truth is to come out, then why not declassify these memos and let the chips fall where they may. This is what Nancy Pelosi has asked to be done and we’ll see exactly who wants the truth known and who does not.

    I agree with Sekan – why are we talking about Pelosi?

    Now that Bob Graham has come out with basically the same scenario, there should be pressure applied to bring full investigations into the Bush Administration.

    But I don’t think an investigation should be done just with the politicians – bring in an independent investigator and go from there.

  7. tosmarttobegop

    A real investigate would catch up some Democrats too, either because of real implication or duplicity. In a way this all could be a good trap, right now the Cons are jumping for joy about the idea of Pelosi being a focus and chirping about a total investigation.
    In part its the “Well John did it too!” defense and in part because of them playing the partisan game and thinking that if it would involve a investigation of the other side. The other side will back down and stop the investigation.

    BUT if it can be played to the point that it is the Cons demanding an investigation then FINALLY the Dem’s can relent and say “OK since you insist!”. That way it is not a partisan dismissal of the evidence and will not allow the Cons to say it’s all Politics!
    SINCE they were the one demanding the investigation instead of the Democrats.

  8. I would prefer getting all the facts out and maybe then we could get rid of those who do our country NO GOOD — from both parties! I’m really disappointed and I don’t care what party they hail from, let’s shine the light on them.

  9. tosmarttobegop

    There really is the “A few good men” element to all this “You can’t handle the truth!”.
    A side from the partisan fighting, there is also that damage it would do to this country’s ego. Ford took that into consideration with his pardon of Nixon. To finally face the reality of this country was taken over for a time by delusional mentally ill people. That we had willfully violated not just our forbidden against torture but we turned into the unwarranted aggressors in the world. That is all a pretty good shock to the system.

  10. Yes, President Ford did take the step that was best for the country, and not best for him politically. I think history might have shown his wisdom. I do understand what you’re saying, and I think President Obama is using that tactic too, or trying to but not meeting with as much success. Maybe it is better for all to simply move forward and put the past behind us. Probably we have ample challenges facing us now and into the future.

  11. lilacluvr

    On one hand I want to see justice be done and bring those responsible for true war crimes to be held accountable. But on the other hand, as fnord and toosmart have brought to light – can we handle the ugly truth – on both sides?

    I can understand Obama’s dilemma here and I can understand why he is just want to focus on moving forward.

    Which brings me to another question. What if the World Court wants to try Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld for war crimes? Would Obama be obligated to defend these US citizens or would he just as soon have this issue be taken out of his hands entirely?

  12. If I were him I would hand it off like the hot potato it is.

    I’m getting irritated enough to want bushco to pay the price for getting us here. I don’t like the feeling, but will admit it.

    One thing about it — we aren’t moving beyond the bush years, and WE THE PEOPLE said loud and clear at the last election we wanted to move waaay beyond those years. I think that administration was a complete train wreck, but if there was a worst part of it, it was cheney. So thanks to his media tour, the worst part of bushco is being kept front and center.

  13. lilacluvr

    And when Cheney is front and center – the Republicans’ poll ratings keep going down and down. I wonder if they will ever go into single digits?

    So, I say, let Darth Cheney talk all he wants.

  14. tstb, I know you are saying that tongue in cheek but here is the answer to their silly argument.

    But, but, there aren’t very many who count themselves as conservatives, so it’s still too small a number of people to win at the national level who think they are winning. And, what are they winning?

    • tosmarttobegop

      Let me guess the protrusion on the left side of my face told you I was being tongue in cheek!

      Yeah, it is a wonder how far out in la-la land they are going with it.
      Right now I have Hannty on and they were just remarking how silent the left has fallen since it is Nancy’s butt on the line!

      A friend of mine once said he thought of going insane. That the world would be such a better place if you could just make up the world you would live in!

      • tosmarttobegop

        Ahh and in the world that Hannity is living in his lower half scares small horse and it is more manly to be wearing a lacy thong! Oh Good God if it was not so funny I would being filling my trash can….