Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
And no dung... you have not addressed that quote once. You continue to try to spin away from it as fast as you can.
Pathetic Pelosi... just PATHETIC....
- Thread starter Cancel 2016.2
- Start date
I understand and concede all of that.
The issue, my slow-witted friend, is whether the CIA lied to Pelosi in 2002 and whether they are lying now about what they told her in 2002.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
No you demwitted hack... the issue is why is Pelosi and the Dem leadership going after lawyers and everyone else that had a hand in the use of waterboarding and yet she is now constantly try to divert attention away from the fact that she KNEW it was going on in 2003 and did NOTHING to stop it. She was COMPLICIT in the act. Period.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
LMAO... yeah, they are simply trying to divert attention from it because no one is making a point of it. That is why she is trying so hard to spin her way out of the fact that she knew.... because she wants to go after the Reps on the issue and now it is blowing back in her face.
Complicit in the act? That's hilarious. But, if that's where you want to go with this then fine. Let's have a commission to investigate it all, the whole deal and see where we end up. Pelosi seems OK with that.
By the way, here is the list of those that are "complicit in the act."
http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009-05-06 EIT ENCLOSURE0001.pdf
Would it be too much trouble for you to explain to me what Pelosi as minority leader should have done when she learned about waterboarding in 2003 that would have absolved her of her "complicity?"
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/14/AR2009051403991.html?hpid=topnews
Nancy Pelosi is a woman of many talents. Yesterday, she performed the delicate art of backtracking while walking sideways.
The speaker of the House had just read a statement accusing the CIA of lying and was trying to beat a hasty retreat from her news conference before reporters could point out contradictions between her current position and her previous statements.
"Thank you!" an aide called out to signal an end to the session. Pelosi walked, sideways, away from the lectern and, still sidling in a sort of crab walk, was halfway to the door when a yell from CNN's Dana Bash, rising above the rest of the shouting, froze her in the aisle.
"Madam Speaker!" the correspondent called out. "I think there's one other question that I would like to ask, if that's okay."
"Sure, okay," Pelosi said, in a way that indicated it was not okay. Pelosi had no choice but to sidle back to the lectern.
Over the next few minutes of shouted questions -- "They lied to you? Were you justified? When were you first told? Did you protest? Why didn't you tell us?" -- the speaker attempted the crab-walk retreat again, returned to the lectern again and then finally skittered out of the room.
The session was bound to require fancy footwork. Intelligence officials last week released documents indicating that Pelosi was briefed in September 2002 about the use of aggressive questioning techniques. The CIA also disclosed that a top Pelosi aide had been briefed in early 2003 that waterboarding was being used to question terrorism suspects.
Republicans pounced: "Nancy Pelosi was an accomplice to 'torture' " said a headline on a piece by Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal. Particularly problematic was Pelosi's statement on April 23 that "we were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used."
Pelosi was out of sorts as she met reporters in her ceremonial office yesterday. "I want to read a statement, because I need to take the time out to do this," she said awkwardly, fishing around for the papers before her. "So bear with me for a moment, because it'll be shorter if I read it. But I am, again, in the -- in the busy schedule that we have, I think it's important to take the time to read this to you."
Carefully, she read that "those briefing me in September 2002 gave me inaccurate and incomplete information" about waterboarding. She admitted that an aide had been briefed a few months later, but then she moved to her fallback argument: It didn't matter if she was told about waterboarding, because "it was clear we had to change the leadership in Congress and in the White House."
NBC's Mike Viqueira was the first questioner. He asked if she had been "complicit" in the use of techniques such as waterboarding because her aide had been told that such techniques were in use.
"My statement is clear, and let me read it again. Let me read it again," she said. She looked for her statement. "I'm sorry, I have to find the page," she said. She read a few lines, then paused. "I'm sorry, I had the pages out of order." By now she had begun to employ her hands in the conversation, raising an index finger, circling her hands and finally moving both hands as if conducting an orchestra.
ABC's Jonathan Karl wanted to make sure he'd heard right. "You're accusing the CIA of lying to you?"
"Yes, misleading the Congress of the United States," Pelosi repeated. As she answered, she held a fist up, waved her index finger, formed her hand into an O, pushed her hair back, then resumed leading the orchestra. She appeared to have developed a case of dry mouth and was swallowing hard.
Now questions were being shouted from all around the room; Pelosi chose one from the back. Did she wish she had done more to object? "No, no, no, no, no, no," Pelosi said. "As I say in my statement," she repeated, looking down at her papers again.
Chad Pergram of Fox News asked if the episode makes it more difficult to have a "truth commission" to probe the use of harsh interrogation methods. Pelosi went back to her written statement: "And that's why I say in this . . ."
An aide was already trying to shut down the session with a "last question" cry, but Pelosi found a reporter who asked about health care -- and then demanded a follow-up. The other reporters grumbled. "Did you get booed?" Pelosi teased.
It was then that the speaker tried to crab-walk out of the session, and CNN's Bash stopped her in her tracks, demanding to know why Pelosi said last month that she hadn't known waterboarding was being used.
"I meant 'we,' we in that -- in that -- meeting," she attempted to answer.
"We were all clearly trying to get at the broader question of whether you knew about waterboarding at all," Bash said. "And the idea that we got from you was that you were never told that waterboarding was being used. But now we know that later, in February, you were told."
"That was beyond the point," Pelosi tried to argue.
As more skeptical questions were shouted, Pelosi opened her eyes wide. She licked her lips. She chopped the air with her hand and moved her arm like a windshield wiper. She swallowed hard. She used both hands to clear her hair from her face as she fired off pleas that "I wasn't briefed," "I wasn't informed" and "They misled us."
"That's it -- we're done!" a Pelosi aide said as the reporters continued to shout questions. Finally, in a burst of sideways energy and with the help of her aides, the speaker crab-walked out of the room.
Nancy Pelosi is a woman of many talents. Yesterday, she performed the delicate art of backtracking while walking sideways.
The speaker of the House had just read a statement accusing the CIA of lying and was trying to beat a hasty retreat from her news conference before reporters could point out contradictions between her current position and her previous statements.
"Thank you!" an aide called out to signal an end to the session. Pelosi walked, sideways, away from the lectern and, still sidling in a sort of crab walk, was halfway to the door when a yell from CNN's Dana Bash, rising above the rest of the shouting, froze her in the aisle.
"Madam Speaker!" the correspondent called out. "I think there's one other question that I would like to ask, if that's okay."
"Sure, okay," Pelosi said, in a way that indicated it was not okay. Pelosi had no choice but to sidle back to the lectern.
Over the next few minutes of shouted questions -- "They lied to you? Were you justified? When were you first told? Did you protest? Why didn't you tell us?" -- the speaker attempted the crab-walk retreat again, returned to the lectern again and then finally skittered out of the room.
The session was bound to require fancy footwork. Intelligence officials last week released documents indicating that Pelosi was briefed in September 2002 about the use of aggressive questioning techniques. The CIA also disclosed that a top Pelosi aide had been briefed in early 2003 that waterboarding was being used to question terrorism suspects.
Republicans pounced: "Nancy Pelosi was an accomplice to 'torture' " said a headline on a piece by Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal. Particularly problematic was Pelosi's statement on April 23 that "we were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used."
Pelosi was out of sorts as she met reporters in her ceremonial office yesterday. "I want to read a statement, because I need to take the time out to do this," she said awkwardly, fishing around for the papers before her. "So bear with me for a moment, because it'll be shorter if I read it. But I am, again, in the -- in the busy schedule that we have, I think it's important to take the time to read this to you."
Carefully, she read that "those briefing me in September 2002 gave me inaccurate and incomplete information" about waterboarding. She admitted that an aide had been briefed a few months later, but then she moved to her fallback argument: It didn't matter if she was told about waterboarding, because "it was clear we had to change the leadership in Congress and in the White House."
NBC's Mike Viqueira was the first questioner. He asked if she had been "complicit" in the use of techniques such as waterboarding because her aide had been told that such techniques were in use.
"My statement is clear, and let me read it again. Let me read it again," she said. She looked for her statement. "I'm sorry, I have to find the page," she said. She read a few lines, then paused. "I'm sorry, I had the pages out of order." By now she had begun to employ her hands in the conversation, raising an index finger, circling her hands and finally moving both hands as if conducting an orchestra.
ABC's Jonathan Karl wanted to make sure he'd heard right. "You're accusing the CIA of lying to you?"
"Yes, misleading the Congress of the United States," Pelosi repeated. As she answered, she held a fist up, waved her index finger, formed her hand into an O, pushed her hair back, then resumed leading the orchestra. She appeared to have developed a case of dry mouth and was swallowing hard.
Now questions were being shouted from all around the room; Pelosi chose one from the back. Did she wish she had done more to object? "No, no, no, no, no, no," Pelosi said. "As I say in my statement," she repeated, looking down at her papers again.
Chad Pergram of Fox News asked if the episode makes it more difficult to have a "truth commission" to probe the use of harsh interrogation methods. Pelosi went back to her written statement: "And that's why I say in this . . ."
An aide was already trying to shut down the session with a "last question" cry, but Pelosi found a reporter who asked about health care -- and then demanded a follow-up. The other reporters grumbled. "Did you get booed?" Pelosi teased.
It was then that the speaker tried to crab-walk out of the session, and CNN's Bash stopped her in her tracks, demanding to know why Pelosi said last month that she hadn't known waterboarding was being used.
"I meant 'we,' we in that -- in that -- meeting," she attempted to answer.
"We were all clearly trying to get at the broader question of whether you knew about waterboarding at all," Bash said. "And the idea that we got from you was that you were never told that waterboarding was being used. But now we know that later, in February, you were told."
"That was beyond the point," Pelosi tried to argue.
As more skeptical questions were shouted, Pelosi opened her eyes wide. She licked her lips. She chopped the air with her hand and moved her arm like a windshield wiper. She swallowed hard. She used both hands to clear her hair from her face as she fired off pleas that "I wasn't briefed," "I wasn't informed" and "They misled us."
"That's it -- we're done!" a Pelosi aide said as the reporters continued to shout questions. Finally, in a burst of sideways energy and with the help of her aides, the speaker crab-walked out of the room.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Why nothing of course... as long as she has her prepared 'I was tricked' written down somewhere. Or perhaps 'they misled me'. She should be good to go.
I mean if I see a crime being committed my first thought is always whether or not leadership should be changed in a couple years to try to stop this crime from occuring right now. How could anyone think otherwise?
Seriously.... do you really think the minority leader is that inept and powerless that nothing could have been done?
THAT would truly be funny especially given all the bullshit from the left recently on how they 'can't get 'x' or 'y' done because they don't have a supermajority' or how the Reps in minority are stopping them from accomplishing 'a' or 'b'. Amazing how when
the Dems are in minority.... they dont have the power to get things done.
the Dems have a majority, but not a supermajority.... they don't have the power to get things done.
I wonder... now that they are likely to hit 60 in the Senate... what will there excuse be?
To be clear... I do not think she HAD to go public with the info... but she should have done SOMETHING because to do nothing means at the least she was complicit in the act.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
you mean all the direct quotes from Pelosi are just too much for you?
Or is it back to the 'attack the source' mantra because once again you cannot comment on the article?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Also... I posted that article prior to seeing your simple question.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
That's the longest non-answer to a question I have seen in a while. And unless you actually to grapple with the fact that she was under a legal obligation to keep the information classified you don't really have leg to stand on. "Something" isn't quite cutting it.
And I guess I'll wait for your charges against the rest that are so-called "complicit in the act."
At least we have conceded that there is an act to be complicit it. It's refreshing that the "we didn't torture" days are over.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Are you seriously advocating that the government can make a law that enforces silence over other illegal acts and that it would be constitutional?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
The 'we didn't torture' never came from me. I have argued as to what is torture and what is not because I still believe that it needs to be defined.
That said, once again you demwit.... yes, there are others that are complicit in the act. That again demwit was not the point of this thread... no matter how many fucking times you try to spin it in that direction.
Tell me demwit... who do you go to when a crime has been committed? Personally I use those individuals in LAW enforcement. Are you telling me her only option was to go to the press? Is she so inept that she could figure out how to dial the FBI? She couldn't get the minority Dems up in arms and get the issue addressed within the confines of Congress? I know you are ignorant, but please tell me you aren't dumb enough to believe she had NO other options.
If she was so adamantly against waterboarding... why did she do NOTHING?
SF - If I tell you that I robbed a bank and you are obligated by law to not disclose whatever it is that I tell you, you are not "complicit." It doesn't work that way.
Also, the FBI knew what was going on. Hell, the DoJ green-lighted it so I don't know that going to the FBI was a realistic option. Do you think this stuff through at all? In fact, when Jane Harman did object to the CIA general counsel after that 2003 briefing here was the response:
So, again, I'm not sure what it is you wanted her to do.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
now THIS must be the very reason that we absolutely can only have lawyers be judges on our courts. everyday people just can't be entrusted to know what is and isn't torture. /sarcasm
Worse yet, one of those lawyers that determined that torture is consistent with US law sits on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
bybee, right? yeah, hows that 'must be lawyers' on the bench again?
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
As I understand it, you cannot force someone to go along and remain silent when the law is being broken. It does not apply to when the Constitution is being violated and the law is being broken.
Again, you pretend that she is fucking powerless, that nothing could be done.
What am I thinking, of course nothing could be done. If you sign the secrecy documents that means they can do anything they want and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. Not a thing....
What a load of shit. You are the biggest fucking hack I have ever seen... and that includes Dixie.