Other than Pelosi, Who Else Did the CIA Mislead...

[Purrfessor]

Bush's very own Secretary of State, Colin Powell.

It's clear that the CIA was on a course to do virtually anything necessary to ensure that the Bush Administration got its way, whether it was selling the public on a trumped up war, or concealing its torture policy from certain members of Congress. And the fact that Powell was mislead is the perfect rebuttal whenever GOP talking heads claim that the CIA is telling the truth and Pelosi is lying. Plus, let's not forget the CIA claims of the two occasions they had met, and briefed Senator Graham, which turned out not to be true.

consortiumnews

From an article by Ray McGovern: "How Torture Trapped Colin Powell."

Powell, whose credibility essentially sealed the deal for war as far as millions of Americans were concerned, also appears to have let himself be manipulated by senior CIA officials who kept him in the dark about crucial details, including the fact that the Defense Intelligence Agency doubted al-Libi’s credibility.

“As you can see, nowhere were we told that the high-level AQ operative had a name, or that he had been interrogated with no US personnel present or much earlier rather than just recently (the clear implication of Tenet's breathtaking delivery),” Wilkerson said.

“And not a single dissent was mentioned (later we learned of the DIA dissent) … All of this was hidden from us - the specific identity, we were informed, due to the desire to protect sources and methods as well as a cooperative foreign intelligence service."

[shraby]

1. Everybody with the WMD debacle.

They let Bush spout all the lies and didn't come forward. It's their fault he got away with it. If they knew differently, the agency should have blown the whistle.

[PassingFair]

2. Not everybody was duped, 126 Congresspeople Voted NO on the IWR.

The MAJORITY of the Dems.

And almost half of the
Dems in the Senate.

Many who voted FOR the IWR
voted KNOWING they were being
lied to, because they figured
it was the safe political bet.

[KansDem]

3. "...because they figured it was the safe political bet."

I often wonder about this--this need to have voted in the affirmative because to do otherwise would have resulted in the neo-con media machine going into high gear to paint these Dems as "soft" on Saddam and therefore "unpatriotic." I wonder if we would have seen an even larger GOP majority in Congress in 2002 if these Dems actually voted against the lying Bushistas...

[PassingFair]

4. Absolutely NOT.

In the next cycle, the war enablers
LOST more elections than the NO voters.

By the next election, there were MORE
Senators who had voted AGAINST the IWR
in the Senate than those who voted for it.

It was a CYNICAL and COWARDLY vote that
people have NOT forgiven.

It played a HUGE part in voters decisions
against both Kerry AND Clinton.

[Metta]

5. You mean aside from the whole world?

:hi: