Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pelosi. one paragraph. from Thinkprogress.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:04 PM
Original message
Pelosi. one paragraph. from Thinkprogress.
What Did Pelosi Know About Torture And What Could She Have Done About It?
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/08/pelosi-torture-briefing/
While it remains unclear what Pelosi knew and when she knew it, it should not be forgotten that Pelosi did not write the memos authorizing the use of torture or carry that torture out; the Bush administration did. Further, the CIA briefed Pelosi without staff, told her their practices were legal, and forbade her from discussing the meeting with colleagues. As such, Pelosi could not work to “outlaw the practices.” Marc Ambinder notes that the only way Pelosi could have registered her objections at that time was to “walk out of the briefing, telling those CIA officials who came that what she just heard did not constitute a formal briefing.” The result? The CIA would have simply tried to re-brief her at a later date, but the Bush administration would have continued to carry out torture anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberalmuse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sanity. Thank you.
I'm not a huge Pelosi fan, but I'm also not buying into the 'pub propaganda on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Not a huge fan either
and I don't make excuses but this is the most accurate synopsis I have read yet. There was surely some political coverage for herself in this but it was a top secret briefing-there wasn't much she could do other than end her career.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm not convinced she should be blamed either. That's exactly
what the rethugs are doing, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I think Nancy was set up for this point in time
the bush cabal of war criminals knew there was a pretty good chance this conversation was going to happen once they were no longer in the wh so they were just getting their alibi's in order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. I think they may have had the briefing, but only because she was first in line if
anything happened to Dick and George and it may be written. What we need to find out whether what's written, if anything, requires her to zip her mouth. It would seem that the leader of the House of Representatives should have legal representation. They are now in a position to say anything. They are after all the expert of expert liars. They could have wna dwould have energetically cheated the country by breaking our law even in a situation like this one. They are play actors - good ones. And they play at telling the truth. And they play at cya - theirs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truth2Tell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 08:57 PM
Response to Original message
6. The CIA doesn't have the legal authority
to "forbid" the minority leader of the House from doing anything.

She was told about CRIMINAL ACTIVITY ferchissakes. Criminal activity IS NOT COVERED by secrecy laws. How hard is it for people to get this through their heads?

This nonsensical meme that Congress members were somehow legally prohibited from disclosing this information is some of the biggest bullshit I've ever seen on DU. And that's saying something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rage for Order Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Contrast Pelosi's actions with those of Lt. Ehren Watada
How many times did I read on DU that soldiers should just refuse to deploy to Iraq, even if it meant jail time? In fact, many here claimed it was a moral imperative. Yet those same individuals do not think that the person third in line for the Presidency should be held to a similar standard. In case anyone needs a refresher on Lt. Watada:

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/44492717.html

The Justice Department is dropping its appeal of a judge's decision that blocked the Army from retrying a Fort Lewis lieutenant who refused to deploy to Iraq.

Army spokesman Joe Piek said Wednesday that Fort Lewis officials learned late last week of the department's decision in the case of Ehren Watada, who claimed the war was illegal and publicly denounced President George W. Bush when he skipped his deployment in 2006.

Watada's first court-martial ended in a mistrial, over his objection. A federal judge ruled last fall that the Army could not try him again on key charges, including missing troop movement, because it would violate his constitutional right to be free from double jeopardy.

The Justice Department initially appealed to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, but later asked the court to dismiss the matter. The court did so Wednesday.

"Because there are no longer any criminal charges pending against Lt. Watada, and because (his) military service has been extended far beyond his normal release date, he anticipates that he will soon be released from active duty," his attorney, James Lobsenz, said in a news release. "He plans to return to civilian life and to attend law school."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-08-09 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Nothing shows that she was told.
She says she wasn't. Also, the discrepancies in what Goss has been saying and the CIA accounts indicate that the documents may not be accurate.

The Repubs are running for cover


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Truth2Tell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-09-09 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. My point is only that IF she was told
she would be complicit. Based on her previous behavior I suspect that she was, but I will wait and see to be sure. And yes, the Repubs want to use this divert from their own far worse crimes. But that's no reason to avoid cleaning our own house as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC