Republicans to Pelosi: Prove Your Case or Apologize to CIA

[twa]

Here is the article Karl Rove wrote for the WSJ, claiming Pelosi was an "accomplice to torture"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124226863721018193.html

So either Karl Rove is just outright lying in order to keep the flames on Pelosi burning, or he is admitting that torture was taking place.

Can't have it both ways.

.

Have trouble with reading comprehension much??:hysterical:

"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?"

[Thiebear]

Also, just because administration officials try and fudge the law by coming up with alternative names for things such as "enhanced interrogation techniques" doesn't change the fact that it is torture. Detainees have died in our custody in Gitmo. I highly doubt from claustraphobia.

Actually if there have been murders as you put it: I'd like to know about that.

The 3 water boardings is fluff in my opinion based on what we do voluntarily in training.., but there is a fine line.

As i've stated: If we have it, it should be rooted out and all those participating should be prosecuted. If not its another fuzzy big foot picture.

[Predicto]

The last thing we need is someone on the Hill thats sole purpose is to twist arms and smooze and win elections for "their" party.

That is what every Speaker of the House does. It is the nature of the job.

You want reasoned, thoughtful debate? Go to the Senate. The House of Reps hasn't had any since 1820 or so.

[Predicto]

The GOP doesnt want her to go away. That's why you dont hear any of them calling for her removal.

IT's obvious she's lying. So either 1-She agreed with Bush Admin that waterboarding isnt torture. or B- She thought it was torture, but didnt care.

Or 3) She was not free to speak about what she knew because the information was classified. Even the Speaker of the House is limited in what he or she can reveal about top secret intelligence information.

I'm not sure we will ever know the true answer - it may be a combination of all of the above.

[Thiebear]

Or 3) She was not free to speak about what she knew because the information was classified. Even the Speaker of the House is limited in what he or she can reveal about top secret intelligence information.

I'm not sure we will ever know the true answer - it may be a combination of all of the above.

There is no chance that you can be briefed on "something new" the Administration wants to do and you have no recourse.

you can't take it to the committee

you can't take it to Fisa or Supreme Court for review as they need no clearance.

Its not really checks and balances if the Admin can just slap a top secret on a Edit: Famous Daves pulled pork sammich and call it a day as torture.

[Predicto]

Have trouble with reading comprehension much??:hysterical:

"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?"

Rove knows, of course, that the answer to this is much more complicated.

Imagine if Nancy Pelosi had gotten up in 2003 and said: "I was just in a top secret classified meeting with CIA officials and they told be that they were doing X to certain prisoners at GITMO. I want to put a stop to it."

What would have been the response of the Administration and the GOP? I don't mean just politically - but legally - if she divulged classified information like that.

Pelosi is in a bind now, there is no two ways about it. She may be lying. But Karl Rove knows that there is absolutely nothing that she could have done about it in 2003, at least not openly. If she is a liar, he is the biggest liar that ever lived.

[Kilmer17]

Or 3) She was not free to speak about what she knew because the information was classified. Even the Speaker of the House is limited in what he or she can reveal about top secret intelligence information.

I'm not sure we will ever know the true answer - it may be a combination of all of the above.

I dont think a crime can be classified. I could be wrong though.

I also heard on Morning JOe this am (Meachem) mentioned that even if she wasnt told about waterboarding on the date in question, she was defiinitely told about it 3 months later. Still years before it became a political issue for the dems.

[twa]

She could have easily called for a closed session of Congress from her position on the committee...you know the proper way to deal with state secrets?

[zoony]

Stories like these would have a whole lot more teeth and credibility if the radical right wing of the GOP hadn't been on a Pelosi witch-hunt for the past 2 years.

There is so much bull**** circulating around right now, it's hard to tell what doesn't stink.

So, all you radicals in both parties- I'd suggest you learn from it. Just like all the dip****s we had to endure who said Bush was a Nazi and was going to make a power grab at the end of his presidency- it made their valid criticisms of the man get swept into the rubbish pile with everything else. Everyone suffers.

I shudder at the thought of a REAL breaking issue surfacing with President Obama- who would take it seriously at this point? After listening to the utter crap spewed about the man for the last 2 years from dip****s on the right.

....

[Predicto]

There is no chance that you can be briefed on "something new" the Administration wants to do and you have no recourse.

you can't take it to the committee

you can't take it to Fisa or Supreme Court for review as they need no clearance.

Its not really checks and balances if the Admin can just slap a top secret on a Edit: Famous Daves pulled pork sammich and call it a day as torture.

There are no immediate checks and balances for national security issues. The executive branch holds all the cards. No one can reveal or discuss state secrets.

The only real check and balance is in the political electoral process years afterwards when the story comes out and the American people get to weigh in on what they think about what was done at the ballot box.

[AAARedskin]

I have met her too, and I completely disagree.

It is true that she is a purely political animal and highly partisan, sometimes shrill, but she is smart as hell and very effective at the nuts and bolts of wielding congressional power and winning elections. She was the primary architect of the Democratic takeover of Congress in the past few years (along with Chuck Shumer). She is an arm twister and a shmoozer and everything else political - and maybe even a liar in the present situation - but she is not stupid.

You don't get to be the first female Speaker of the House by luck. Everyone in that building owes her something.

As I recall, people used to say that Ronald Reagan wasn't smart because they mistook his folksy mannerism for a lack of intellectual depth. They were wrong. Pelosi is the same way. She acts like your grandma to your face, but is always working all the angles behind the scene.

I think she conned you.

You're wrong. Period. She is a fool and a loon, and here's why: even if it's magically proved that she is telling the truth, she then a complete incompetent moron who isn't fit to be Speaker. Sorry, but there's no way to slice this to make her come out on top. She is either lying through her teeth (most likely) or she's a bozo. Pretty fun watching someone this corrupt come up with new lie after new lie each time she responds and speaks about the topic! You must be so proud to have voted for such a "good leader" who represents all the bad things that the rest of the nation thinks about when they think of politicians from FRISCO!!!!!!!

[Mad Mike]

Just because the pictures you posted happen to be another form of torture, doesn't make water boarding, not torture.

Here is the article Karl Rove wrote for the WSJ, claiming Pelosi was an "accomplice to torture"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124226863721018193.html

So either Karl Rove is just outright lying in order to keep the flames on Pelosi burning, or he is admitting that torture was taking place.

Can't have it both ways.

Also, just because administration officials try and fudge the law by coming up with alternative names for things such as "enhanced interrogation techniques" doesn't change the fact that it is torture. Detainees have died in our custody in Gitmo. I highly doubt from claustraphobia.

Reading Comprehension 101.

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.

Notice that he does not call it torture. So where does it come from?

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?

If Mrs. Pelosi considers the enhanced interrogation techniques to be torture

Does that sound like he agrees with her?

Here is the key to his use of the word.

does that make her an accessory to a crime of torture, as many Democrats are calling enhanced interrogation?

He is describing the democratic position.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy wants an independent investigation of Bush administration officials. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers feels the Justice Department should investigate and prosecute anyone who violated laws against committing torture. Are these and other similarly minded Democrats willing to have Mrs. Pelosi thrown into their stew of torture conspirators as an accomplice?

Here, he is saying that if the democrats consider it to be torture doesn't that make Pelosi an accomplice. It's that simple. He never called it torture. You put those words in his mouth to fabricate a false argument. Nice try though.

And Here he gets down to the core issue...

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.

Edit- OK re-reading I take it you are not Joining No cal in his claim. I should have known better. Sorry.

[Predicto]

I dont think a crime can be classified. I could be wrong though.

That is not my understanding.

In decades past, the CIA has attempted to assassinate foreign heads of state. We know that this is a crime. The information remains classified.

[deejaydana]

I don't know how or why any person would defend Pelosi's actions of the last two weeks. Panetta's rebuke of her (in so many words calling her statements false) should be evidence enough that she made a miscalculation here. Somehow on MSNBC last night one female reporter stated that the GOP 'just won't let this story die.' Why the hell would they at this point? They're just defending themselves from her ill conceived assault. It was Pelosi who took this too far and now she's tapdancing to protect her flimsy reputation. You can't have it both ways Nancy. She must be crazy popular in the hallways of the CIA this month.

[Predicto]

You're wrong. Period. She is a fool and a loon, and here's why: even if it's magically proved that she is telling the truth, she then a complete incompetent moron who isn't fit to be Speaker. Sorry, but there's no way to slice this to make her come out on top. She is either lying through her teeth (most likely) or she's a bozo. Pretty fun watching someone this corrupt come up with new lie after new lie each time she responds and speaks about the topic! You must be so proud to have voted for such a "good leader" who represents all the bad things that the rest of the nation thinks about when they think of politicians from FRISCO!!!!!!!

Whatever you say, chief. Thanks for the reasoned discourse.

I might add that San Francisco has always been very concerned about what the radical right thinks about it. I will be sure to pass along your comments to the people in charge.

[Ghost of]

Somehow on MSNBC last night one female reporter stated that the GOP 'just won't let this story die.'

Yeah, no media bias at all. meanwhile, the story just won't stop, fictional or otherwise with Sarah Palin or anyone else regarded as an "enemy" of the cause.

[zoony]

As I recall, people used to say that Ronald Reagan wasn't smart because they mistook his folksy mannerism for a lack of intellectual depth. They were wrong. Pelosi is the same way. She acts like your grandma to your face, but is always working all the angles behind the scene.

I think she conned you.

You're wrong. Period. She is a fool and a loon, and here's why:

This reminds me of a story a friend of mine likes to tell- he's been a building contractor for 40 years... born and raised in TN and his drawl is so thick I doubt most people not from here would ever understand him.

Anyways, in the mid 1990s he had several contractors building in his development- one of them was from Pennsylvania. Of course, he was in town to make a quick buck, and was discreetly mentioned that all of the slack-jawed yokels around him would be easily taken advantage of and he'd make a killing building homes. The term he used was "slow, dim, hillbillies" (at least in the story relayed to me)

About 6 months later my friend ran into him again as he was wrapping up construction on a few homes. The guy was in a foul mood and was already making plans to return home to PA. He'd had enough. According to him, those "slow, dim hillbillies" had relieved him of every cent he had. OLS

The moral of the story is- you don't get very far in life underestimating people, especially due to your own ignorance.

I'm not a Pelosi fan, but I would never call her dumb. Same goes for all those so quick to write Bush II off as a lightweight.

....

[Predicto]

Predicto - I expect more from you. As a lawyer you should be more precise in your interpretation of a persons words. Falling for the twisted version NoCalMike has put forward is beneath you.

Honestly Mike, I don't want to get into it with you again. We agree on so many issues, but when it comes to subjects like WMDs or torture, nuance and ambiguity seems to go out the window, good will is lost, and the back and forth attacks begin. I am guilty of it myself, and I just don't want to do it again.

[Predicto]

I don't know how or why any person would defend Pelosi's actions of the last two weeks. Panetta's rebuke of her (in so many words calling her statements false) should be evidence enough that she made a miscalculation here. Somehow on MSNBC last night one female reporter stated that the GOP 'just won't let this story die.' Why the hell would they at this point? They're just defending themselves from her ill conceived assault. It was Pelosi who took this too far and now she's tapdancing to protect her flimsy reputation. You can't have it both ways Nancy. She must be crazy popular in the hallways of the CIA this month.

I agree with you. I think her actions of the last two weeks have been horribly miscalculated, and I think she is putting her own needs above the needs of the Obama administration.

Obama has been extraordinarily moderate and nuanced in his handling of the whole GITMO/torture/CIA issues, both in word and action. He has pissed off the Code Pink people something fierce and cost himself a lot of political capital by not going whole hog after the Bush Administration, by not closing GITMO immediately, by forclosing any retaliation against CIA officers, etc.

Pelosi is doing Obama no favors. She should have just said: "I recall things a bit differently" and left it at that.

[Predicto]

Yeah, no media bias at all. meanwhile, the story just won't stop, fictional or otherwise with Sarah Palin or anyone else regarded as an "enemy" of the cause.

Ummm... what does Sarah Palin have to do with anything in this discussion?

[Ghost of]

Ummm... what does Sarah Palin have to do with anything in this discussion?

Ummm...I quoted a poster talking about an MSNBC reporter saying the "GOP won't let this story die," which revealed, in my opinion, something about the nature of the people who report and shape the news.

I just brought her name up as an example, not to divert it into an actual discussion about her.

[Mad Mike]

Honestly Mike, I don't want to get into it with you again. We agree on so many issues, but when it comes to subjects like WMDs or torture, nuance and ambiguity seems to go out the window, good will is lost, and the back and forth attacks begin. I am guilty of it myself, and I just don't want to do it again.

Me either, which is why I corrected my post.

But I will say this. Clearly Pelosi is a formidable politician to get to the position she holds but that does not make her smart or wise. It means she's a skilled politician. That's it. And if she's not a moron, then she is truly evil.

[Predicto]

Me either, which is why I corrected my post.

But I will say this. Clearly Pelosi is a formidable politician to get to the position she holds but that does not make her smart or wise. It means she's a skilled politician. That's it. And if she's not a moron, then she is truly evil.

It is all perspective, Mike. I care deeply about this country's security, but I often vehemently disagree with you on how best to achieve that security.

Does that make me either a moron or truly evil?

I'm asking you because I know you will answer honestly. Some posters here will claim I'm both.

[Kilmer17]

It is all perspective, Mike. I care deeply about this country's security, but I often vehemently disagree with you on how best to achieve that security.

Does that make me either a moron or truly evil?

I'm asking you because I know you will answer honestly. Some posters here will claim I'm both.

Or neither.

[Predicto]

Ummm...I quoted a poster talking about an MSNBC reporter saying the "GOP won't let this story die," which revealed, in my opinion, something about the nature of the people who report and shape the news.

I just brought her name up as an example, not to divert it into an actual discussion about her.

Maybe they said that because of the numerous press releases and faxes they receive from the Republican National Committee every single day trying to hype this issue?

Seriously, sometimes issues are driven by one party or the other. The Carrie Prejean beauty queen story, for example. I have heard or read literally dozens of Republicans and conservatives yelling about the witch hunt against Ms. Prejean over the past few weeks. The funny thing is, I haven't heard a single Democrat or Liberal or anyone else actually ATTACK her in any way, other than that d-bag Perez Hilton the very first time. Everyone says she has a right to her opinion and should not have been punished for it. No one in gay old San Francisco is talking about, caring about, trying to "get" Carrie Prejean. The only interest at all was when some nude photos popped up - that got MY interest.

Yet Hannity and Rush and Levin talk about the ongoing liberal attacks and persecution of Ms. Prejean every single day. GOP politicians make speeches about it. Conservative columnists write scathing Op-Ed pieces about it. I think it would be fair to say that this issue is being driven for political advantage, would it not?

It happens all the time - by both sides. I don't think that the media really exposes any bias simply by saying "The GOP won't let this story die."