Pelosi's Torture Briefing
| Fri May. 8, 2009 9:45 AM PDT
Did the CIA tell Nancy Pelosi about waterboarding back in 2002, when she was the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee? The chart on the right, provided by the CIA, is the sum total of the evidence at hand: on September 4, 2002, Pelosi and Porter Goss met with CIA briefers, who describe the meeting this way:
Briefing on EITs [enhanced interrogation techniques] including EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed.
Pelosi says waterboarding was never mentioned. And the CIA document, which specifically mentions waterboarding in a later briefing given to Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, doesn't say it was brought up in the Pelosi meeting, even though Zubaydah had been waterboarded dozens of times by then.
Greg Sargent seems to think this means Pelosi is probably telling the truth. Waterboarding a guy 80 times isn't something that just slips your mind, after all, so the fact that it's not mentioned probably means Pelosi was never briefed about it.
Unfortunately, I suspect we'll simply never know for sure — although Sam Stein reports today that a senior aide to another member of Congress says that waterboarding was never mentioned at other briefings held around the same time. So right now, all we can do is guess. Here's mine: both sides are probably twisting the truth. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the CIA was a little cagey during its briefings in 2002, but I also wouldn't be surprised if members of Congress are now being a little cagey about exactly what they were told at the time. The motivations on both sides are just too strong to expect otherwise.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Hat tip tom maguire Sorry,
Submitted by John Hansen (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 9:57 AM PDT.
Hat tip tom maguire
Sorry, waterboarding or no waterboarding she is still caught in a lie.
“In that or any other briefing . . . we were not, and I repeat, were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation techniques were used,” Pelosi said at a news conference in April. “What they did tell us is that they had some legislative counsel . . . opinions that they could be used, but not that they would.”
[ bold added ]
That's all very nice but
Submitted by enver (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 9:59 AM PDT.
That's all very nice but it's Friday and WHERE ARE THE KITTEHS?
logic
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 10:02 AM PDT.
Pelosi having motive to lie about knowing x is not reason to believe she didn't know x.
I don't get it....
Submitted by Robert Earle (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 10:26 AM PDT.
I don't get it....
There's a bank that gets robbed by a gang of robbers, and Pelosi was across the street at the time. The police ask her if she saw the robbers. She says she them going in but not coming out, so she can't be sure. So the police accuse her of withholding evidence, which maybe she is and maybe she isn't. If she saw them, she should tell the cops.
But in the meantime, THERE"S A GANG OF BANK ROBBERS GETTING AWAY!!!!
What the hell?!?
Whoa are you <i>the</i> Robert Earle??
Submitted by Godless Heathen on Fri May. 8, 2009 11:10 AM PDT.
My uncle must have showed me this videotape of College Bowl 20 times. He was supposed to be on the show, but got sick and couldn't make the trip so they sent his alternate. Either way, good comment. But, if you are Robert Earle, know that nerds like my uncle and I still love College Bowl after all these years. I've always wanted to be a "Varsity Scholar"
PS - If you still have those eyeglasses you used to wear, I'll pay you for them. Email me at jamessellscds@gmail.com
Not THAT Robert Earle
Submitted by Robert Earle (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 11:59 AM PDT.
My name really is Robert Earle, but of course I'm not THAT Robert Earle...I'm just barely old enough to remember him on GE College Bowl.
He wasn't waterboarded 80
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 12:48 PM PDT.
He wasn't waterboarded 80 times either. The liberal media such as yourselves has grossly exaggerated that number. There's a difference between having water thrown on your face, and being waterboarded. Check the records.
yeah yeah sure sure
Submitted by smitisan on Fri May. 8, 2009 2:56 PM PDT.
I read those "facts," and what they tried to claim was that the guy was only put on the board five times, and the count came from the number of times they poured water on him. Fact of the matter is, they were only supposed to be allowed to do twelve "pours" per session, so do the math. It's kinda like tying somebody to the whipping post and giving him thirty lashes, then saying he was only whipped once.
"You signed the papers. You wanted to be here!" -Drill Sgt. Leach, 1971
Left Wing Liars
Submitted by Godless Heathen on Fri May. 8, 2009 3:07 PM PDT.
It never ends. I read the same thing in that commie pinko anarchist tree-hugger lily-livered leftist union fanzine, the Christian Science Monitor.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0420/p99s01-duts.html
Enhanced Briefing Techniques
Submitted by Ross Best on Fri May. 8, 2009 1:47 PM PDT.
Here is a suggestion that some might consider tantamount to torture:
Official but secret minutes should be kept whenever congressional leaders receive official but secret briefings.
And whenever there is a public dispute later about what went on during such briefings someone with appropriate security clearance should just check the minutes and eliminate uncertainty about what actually happened.
If both sides are twisting
Submitted by Marc W on Fri May. 8, 2009 2:02 PM PDT.
If both sides are twisting the truth, and if in this case that means there is more a less a tie, I'd call the tie in favor of the people who were supposed to be informed. The people doing the informing have an affirmative duty to inform.
So What if Pelosi Knew?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 2:53 PM PDT.
I don't get it: what difference does it make if Pelosi knew?
If laws were broken, prosecute.
It's not like Pelosi had any role in the torture.
Oh contraire
Submitted by wbinmd (not verified) on Fri May. 8, 2009 5:41 PM PDT.
If Pelosi knew of something that she would later condemn, she should have brought it up when she FIRST knew about it. Fact is, all politicians seek to blow the whistle or condemn when it will benefit their quest for power.
Senator Bob Graham
Submitted by pol on Fri May. 8, 2009 6:27 PM PDT.
was on Hardball and other news shows back then saying, "The Bush administration is doing bad stuff, but it's secret information that I'm not allowed to discuss." Somebody should ask him.
kittens in sealed bags
Submitted by glasnost (not verified) on Sat May. 9, 2009 8:17 AM PDT.
what's important is not whether or not Pelosi knew; what's important is to highlight how utterly powerless she was either way.
Exactly what the heck was she supposed to do about it? Tell someone? It was classified. Reporting classified info to the press is, of course, illegal, and the Bush Admin would certainly have thrown her in prison, not to mention whipped up nine miles of lies about how we were all in danger because of her. And in 2002 - this is PRE Iraq War folks - who would have had her back?
Was she supposed to go to the FBI, and say, "this is illegal"? And when the FBI says, "the DOJ says it's legal", what the heck then? Who prosecutes the DOJ? The only reason we're even having the argument about Yoo/Bybee is that the DOJ is under new control, and contemplating prosecuting *ex-*members.
Was she supposed to get Congress to pass a law.. wait. Two problems. First, everything is under Republican control. So, automatically dead. No chance. Second - she can't even make an argument for a law without passing along info, which is illegal to tell EVEN TO DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSMEN. Heck, she can't even tell them what they're supposed to be outlawing.
What's she supposed to do? A court case? Does she even have standing?
What's clear here is that the reporting system is completely, completely, completely broken. First of all, in a consensual body reporting info to two people doesn't count for anything - especially minority house leaders who have zero power to do anything. what ever allows this to be reported to less than full committees need to be ended.
Frankly, Congress needs the power to declassify its own stuff - either party - with an intel commitee vote, with good cause. Nothing in the constitution was intended to give the exec branch power over secrecy. The results of this have been disasterous.
Not so fast, Kevin.
Submitted by Brian on Sat May. 9, 2009 10:48 AM PDT.
The chart says that Rep. Pelosi heard "a description of the particular EIT's that had been employed" against Zubaydah. Hard to imagine that did not include the waterboarding. Noting that it is mentioned elsewhere but not in this passage is very weak evidence in her favor. Further, Rep. Goss's revelations in the Post support the CIA's position. Remember, this briefing took place just less than a year after 9/11. No one in Congress was going to complain about whatever was done to these guys. The situation is different now, so Rep. Pelosi has changed her tune. Your point about both sides having motive to muddy the waters is well taken, but Madam Speaker almost certainly knew what was going on and didn't much care back then.
Pelosi must resign immediately
Submitted by Anon92107 (not verified) on Sat May. 9, 2009 11:13 AM PDT.
Considering the trials of Germans and Japanese after WWII, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Yoo et al. must be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Pelosi is now proven to have to have aided and abetted the waterboarding, especially since she was a congressional leader and should have made sure it wasn't occurring on her watch.
Pelosi and all briefed congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle must at the very least resign immediately because they had a responsibility to make sure Americans were not committing war crimes against humanity. They have no excuse.
How moronic.
Submitted by Brian on Sat May. 9, 2009 2:02 PM PDT.
That's right - the U.S. is no better than Hitler's Germany. Jeebus.
Pelosi
Submitted by JReefers (not verified) on Sat May. 9, 2009 3:32 PM PDT.
No wonder impeachment was off the table
Executive banch is responsible
Submitted by little ole jim (not verified) on Sun May. 10, 2009 9:21 AM PDT.
The Executive branch was in charge, had the information, and controlled the information and how and to whom it was presented. That branch bears the huge share of the responsibility.
I will not jump to conclusions about Pelosi based upon CIA documtation that does not even mention waterboarding.
Michael Sheehy news makes it obvious Pelosi has been lying
Submitted by Joe Yowsa (not verified) on Sun May. 10, 2009 4:48 PM PDT.
Her aide, Michael Sheehy, was also briefed on Feb. 5, 2003. Also Pelosi says she "concurred" with Harman's letter of objection. (Where is the record of that "concurrence") Who do you think you're kidding?
briefed or not
Submitted by Maggie (not verified) on Thu May. 14, 2009 4:04 PM PDT.
Unless she was deaf and blind, living under a rock in a podunk 3rd world country, she should have known about it!
It was public knowledge in '04.. in 1994, while she was in the U.S. house of reps, the passed a law for "Torture lite"
There is no way in hell she couldn't have known. And if she's truly that stupid to have missed it, she needs to be held accountable and kicked out of office for good.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
