Nancy Pelosi

Discussion in 'Politics' started by thebeast1, May 14, 2009.

  1. thebeast1

    thebeast1 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    150
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Delft, Netherlands
    Suprised no one is talking about it. The real quest is will the Obama administration throw her under the bus and hold her reliable for her part in this torture too, or is he simply going to give some eloquent speach about moving the country forward and forgo prosecution of Bush administration officials in hopes of sparing Pelosi.

    One thing is quite clear,she knew about it when it started happening, and she bold face lied to the people saying she had no knowledge (Ok Mrs. Pelosi why were you briefed by the CIA again?). Where were her objections in 2002?

    Looks like she has been caught with her pants down.
     
  2. houtx48

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    7,095
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    i'm far from a conservative but ol nancy reminds me of smiling hyena in a dress, if her and harry are the best the demos can come up with the fundies will be back by next election.
     
  3. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,249
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    459
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    This is all a smokescreen by the Republicans to project the blame onto someone else.

    She was briefed as the MINORITY leader on what the CIA was doing.

    It was not a moment that she was supposed to use to say "AHA!!! Now I've caught you red handed!"

    It was a moment for her to be grateful that she was even being briefed on the matter since that was the first time that the CIA had ever done so.

    This is all a pile of bullshit... I mean, Nancy Pelosi is no angel, but this is just a pathetic attempt to sort of sway the potential jury before there is even a trial.

    Pelosi said that she had been advised at the 2002 briefing about techniques the Bush administration was “considering using in the future” — and that she’d been assured they were legal. Pelosi also pointed to a letter from CIA Director Leon Panetta saying that the memo’s description of the briefings “may not be accurate.”

    How the fuck is that any where near having a hand in creating the policies of torture?

    They came to her and told her what they were considering using in the future and maybe what they have done in the past and that it is all entirely legal.

    What fucking culpability does she have when she is LIED TO?

    Keep on listening to Rush and or Savage. Keep on getting your news from FOX and the right wing blogs.

    You will be consistently tying your brain into a knot that you will NEVER be able to undo. Good luck.
     
  4. B_625girth

    B_625girth New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,372
    Likes Received:
    13
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    midwest
    politics suck. the party not in power, goes after the party that is in power and nothing gets done. the republicans seem to do this a little more than the dems, but that is just my opinion. obama had not been in power 100 days and the repubs were blaming him for shit Bush did in his 1st 4 yrs.
     
  5. thebeast1

    thebeast1 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    150
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Delft, Netherlands
    You need to get over yourself. If she had objections (on a moral level as she is proudly boasting now) on these enhanced interrogation techniques she should have raised those objections then.

    It doesn't matter if she was a minority, majority or leader of the fucking ent people. If they were considering using them,then she was in the position to say "hey, this isn't right, lets not go there". I don't give a shit if she should have been grateful for being briefed. She was one person that had the abilities to question the ethics and raise red flags up prior to it even starting, and she failed to do so. If she is going to be the flag bearer now for ethics then she sure in the hell better swallow some of her own medicine.

    If any republican official is going to be held accountable then she by any standard she should be as well. What is beyond me is how your even defending her on this one. " Oh she knew that they were thinking about using these interrogation methods, but she should be held accountable for not opposing use of such methods".

    Keep on listening to rush and or savage? Really, do you want to go there. Honestly that makes me just want to say a big FUCK You. I hate the far right and their cronies just about as much as you. But then again the democrats shouldnt' be held accountable for anything right? Or wait, maybe your a closet conservative and are really thinking that only the republicans can be held accountable for anything. Not much difference between the Bush Politics and the Pelosi politics. Then again you may not understand that at all because you seem to be on the attitude that anything that questions the party is clearly a Rush supporter huh?
     
  6. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    I just posted this in another thread, but this is really an attempt at distraction, a 'poison pill defense by those directly involved in torture.. Nancy Pelosi and other congressional leaders should answer under oath about what they knew and when they knew it. Of course, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others should also testify.

    I am not a Pelosi supporter, and in fact, am very disappointed with the Democratic leadership during both its time in the minority and since 2007. Yet, it is not at all clear that Pelosi knew the details of the torture program. Consider the following.

    -- Pelosi's statements that she was not briefed (or briefed at the most general level) have been corroborated by ex-Senator Graham and congressional staffers.
    -- The statements by the CIA have been less than clear about the actual content of the briefings.
    -- The Bush administration had a long history of deciding 'executive privilege' and not revealing information during congressional oversight hearings.
    -- The CIA is in the business of keeping secrets and telling lies by its very nature. Throughout my adult life, they have dissembled, obfuscated, and outright lied about many issues.
    -- Dick Cheney would have come out already, if he had any evidence that Congress was fully briefed on the torture program.
    -- The administration had an approach based on getting legal 'cover' from the OLC, not seeking Congressional approval. The idea that they actually briefed congressional leaders appropriately is not consistent with their other known actions.

    So, bottom line, Pelosi has a motivation to say she was not briefed, since this would certainly end her speakership and potentially her career. But, I think the weight of what is known says that this story by the excusers of tortures is far from proven.
     
  7. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Exactly. A nice, little technicality that conservatives are exploiting to the fullest. Nancy Pelosi HAD to know what was going on, or at least a good portion of it. And due to the fact that the Democrats didn't have any real veto power in congress back when "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" was being proposed and voted upon, her hands were literally tied.

    However, this won't stop the "morality police" from crying foul, and asking for her head. She's screwed either way you look at it.
     
    #7 B_VinylBoy, May 14, 2009
    Last edited: May 14, 2009
  8. dreamer20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Messages:
    4,492
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    N.Providence
    She was told that information under an oath of secrecy. And I agree with tripod et al that this focus on Pelosi is a partisan diversionary tactic to take the spotlight off of those who implemented the torture policies.
     
  9. D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,539
    Likes Received:
    1
    At best Nancy Pelosi is a sideshow.

    If she listened to the CIA and acquiesced and did nothing, that's on her.

    But why isn't the spotlight on Dick fucking Cheney?


    Is it not ironic that conservatives are more interested whether Pelosi did or did not know about EITs? And when she knew it?

    Why is the spotlight not shining brightly on the people who conceived and developed an illegal torture agenda (yes, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that EITs violate the Geneva Conventions. Barack Obama also says torture is illegal).


    Let's say Dick Cheney rapes a woman then kills her. Nancy Pelosi saw, but does nothing. Yes, she'd be guilty of doing nothing. But when is Congress going to subpoena Dick Cheney?



    When congresspersons are briefed on classified information by the CIA, what are the rules on making this information public? Pelosi is bound to secrecy and cannot even tell her staff. There are federal laws.


    Why are we not focussing on who overthrew the Geneva Conventions? And conceived and developed an illegal torture program? Hanging detainees from the ceiling naked in hoods is not an interrogation technique.

    Conservatives want to crucify Pelosi, then walk away, leaving Cheney, Rumsfeld and other lawbreakers untouched.
     
    #9 D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse, May 14, 2009
    Last edited: May 14, 2009
  10. tripod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2006
    Messages:
    5,249
    Albums:
    3
    Likes Received:
    459
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Statesville N.C.
    How was she supposed to raise an objection when she was sworn to secrecy? You obviously don't know much about security clearances, sensitive classified documents and the protocol of which one is supposed to follow when exposed to these papers.

    How was the minority leader supposed to stop what the CIA was doing? They told her that it was all legal. What exactly was she supposed to do? Take it to the press so she can get thrown in jail for treason? Are you daft?

    Dude, they didn't perform a fucking waterboarding in front of her so that she could see what the hell was actually going on... they told her that they were using or going to use enhanced interrogation tactics that are LEGAL through and through. Your partisan bias is leading you to react wildly to a rather benign briefing.

    You are not questioning the party, you are trying to lay blame where there is none, and that is usually Rush's area of expertise. Conservatives that hide behind a non partisan facade can usually be seen miles away for what they really are, you are no exception.
     
  11. thebeast1

    thebeast1 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    150
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    6
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Delft, Netherlands
    Source: Aide told Pelosi waterboarding had been used - CNN.com

    A source close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi now confirms that Pelosi was told in February 2003 by her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, that waterboarding was actually used on CIA detainee Abu Zubaydah.

    At that or any other briefing, and that was the only briefing that I was briefed on in that regard, we were not -- I repeat, we were not -- told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used, " Pelosi said on April 23.

    It is funny when an Republican or democrat gets caught in a bold face lie, gets caught with their pants down, many just are willing to blame the other party on it. How many republicans were crying foul against democrats when all the scandals of the Repugs came about a few years ago.

    Yeah it is a partisan diversionary tactic, BUT if there are going to be republican's that get nailed for knowing that this was going on then she sure in the hell better get bent over too. If we are going for justice here folks lets go for justice. Lets not be blinded by party affiliation. If we are going to deam that water boarding is torture, and those responsible and in the know are going to be held accountable, lets get all those involved on it.

    An Oath of secrecy doesn't stop someone for standing up and doing what is right. If a document comes forth saying she , upon finding out that they were possibly waterboarding people- opposed the administration on it via private means, or once upon finding out they were using it opposed the administration then I wouldn't be bringing this up.

    Just goes to show you that some of those who are party affiliated are such through and through, and turn blind eyes when it benefits them. I think the American people deserve to know the true story behind all of this. Either she knew or she didn't. If she did why didn't she stand up and say this isn't right. If we are going to prosecute people that knew then why wouldn't she be in that same boat.
     
  12. faceking

    faceking Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,445
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    26
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Mavs, NOR * CAL
    Who cares if they waterboarded. This wasn't Pol Pot doing to commit genocide or punish ppl... it was extract information from bad guys to save lives.

    What a fucking waste of taxpayer dollars.
     
  13. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    Of course, facey, we know that these guys were all terrorists because they were charged, tried, and convicted.

    Oh wait, they weren't. The US military decided that they were guilty. That makes me feel better.

    Everyone assumes that all prisoners at Gitmo are guilty. So far, the focus has been on folks like KSM etc that are most likely guilty of involvement (perhaps not as serious as some claim though). I wonder what people will think when it comes out that some of the 'bounty prisoners' were also tortured?
     
  14. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    I agree with this, and actually think Tripod and VB think so too (not to put words in their mouths), so I don't know who you are shouting at :)

     
  15. rubirosa

    rubirosa Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2008
    Messages:
    744
    Likes Received:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Palm Springs
    Poor Nancy Pelosi. Somehow she thought that Water Boarding is a new form of Surfing.
     
  16. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,280
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,118
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    A "new" wrinkle emerges:
    Waterboarding IS torture. The USA has prosecuted and convicted those who have used it in the past. Let's see where this goes.


    Nancy Pelosi: CIA Lied To Me



    WASHINGTON — Under strong attack from Republicans, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi accused the and Bush administration of misleading her about waterboarding detainees in the war on terror and sharply rebutted claims she was complicit in its use.
    "To the contrary ... we were told explicitly that waterboarding was not being used," she told reporters, referring to a formal CIA briefing she received in the fall of 2002.
    Pelosi said she subsequently learned that other lawmakers were told several months later by the CIA about the use of waterboarding.
    "I wasn't briefed, I was informed that somebody else had been briefed about it," she said

    Nancy Pelosi: CIA Lied To Me


    Pelosi: Bush briefers lied to me

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Bush administration intelligence officials "misled" her by saying they weren't using waterboarding on terror detainees during a Sept. 2002 briefing — months after they had actually begun waterboarding Abu Zubaydah.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennt...ied_to_me.html

    Pelosi says CIA misled her on waterboarding

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today accused CIA officials of misleading her in 2002 about the use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding. Pelosi reiterated an earlier claim that she was briefed on such techniques only once -- in September 2002 -- and that she was told at the time that the techniques were not being used

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/...ing/index.html

    Pelosi Accuses CIA of 'Misleading' Congress on Waterboarding

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the CIA of misleading Congress about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terror detainees.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...rboarding-use/
     
  17. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah....a whole lot of 'UN-NAMED' sources going on from the Architects of this horror show.
    But Nancy has CRAZY BITCH googly eye's.....lets get er!
     
  18. D_Sir Fitzwilly Wankheimer III

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    0
    No dude she's just a crazy bitch, along with barney frank, howard dean and the rest of the circus.
     
  19. pym

    pym New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    1,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    YAWN......I've never heard those sorts of things in this forum before.
    You are offering up the most amazing and freshest insights i've yet read here.
     
  20. D_Tully Tunnelrat

    D_Tully Tunnelrat New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,168
    Likes Received:
    1
    The problem Obama now faces is what to do with them. So far, the proposed solution is indefinitely detention on US soil, which is hardly a long term option.

    WT has it right, NP is a sideshow. I'm not a fan of her leadership, or Reid's, but clearly they were not setting policy with regard to Gitmo. Let's see who could that have been... and why aren't they facing questioning now?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted