The way I see it, Pelosi has two options...

[shraby]

she can step down because of the loss of people's trust in her because of the Wapo article...she took an oath so she still can't reveal what she saw. Or she can give the nod to Conyers to start impeachment not only of Cheney but Bush, Meirs, Addington, etal.
During impeachment proceedings she can be called as a witness and therefore be able to tell the whole story to the public, and possibly clear her name.
When she was briefed on the CIA interrogation methods and didn't object, she became a "made person" for the GOP, just like a person who wants to join the mob has to watch and take part in a murder. They are forever under the mob's thumb, as she is under the GOP's thumb. Damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.
The advice I would give to Pelosi is the best defense is a good offense.

[orleans]

1. maybe she's been trying to keep this event under wraps and that

was why impeachment was off the table--i won't push impeachment as long as no one knows i was briefed/informed about the torture

well--if that's the case, i'd say the dynamics have changed.

[shraby]

2. In spades it's changed.

If she values her political career, she'd better set the table now. That would do two things, take the heat off her and give her an opportunity to testify when called.

[msongs]

3. let's get somebody who thinks the purpose of an opposition party is to OPPOSE nt

[Benhurst]

4. Recommended ...

This is THE story of the day. Even more important than an Oprah Winfrey shindig.

We're talking about war crimes and treason here.

Recommended :bounce: #1

[gaiilonfong]

5. Pelosi must reign immediately or be IMPEACHED

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Pelosi_did_not_object_to_waterboarding_1209.html
According to the article;
We now know why Queen Pelosi got rid of Jane Harmon. Harmon(who I don't like she is too hawkish) was the ONLY one who objected to the criminal administration using waterboarding and breaking American and International laws. We MUST not be hypocrites and criminal enablers like the ReTHUGS. We MUST hold our Democratic leaders accountable for their actions, and what Pelosi, Rockefeller did was CRIMINAL. This may be why these leaders have been an abomination and totally ineffectual as leaders. The Bushies had this on them. I hope we as Democrats learn that we can NEVER enable the ReTHUGlicans because they will eventually use any information against those who enable their criminal behavior, by leaking information, this very information we now are reading in the WaPo. We must defend our constitution even if it means we must impeach one of our own otherwise we are NO BETTER, that the criminal Bushies and their enablers both Democrats and ReTHUGlicans. This is such a sad day and a very defining moment for all of us progressives. We MUST NOT let Pelosi and the others get away with this criminal behavior. If we do our party will suffer in 2008, because Americans will not see a difference between the criminals in both parties.!!!

[liberalmuse]

8. I wholeheartedly agree.

She must do her sworn duty to uphold and protect The Constitution by starting impeachment proceedings NOW, or relinquish her position as Speaker. Any bets she'll do neither? I'm absolutely disgusted. I expect this shit from Bush et al, but when someone proclaiming to be one thing is really the opposite, they've earned my utter and complete contempt.

[ronnykmarshall]

23. Impeached?

Good luck on that.

[catmandu57]

6. I bet she stonewalls

and tells us to go fuck ourselves.

[gaiilonfong]

7. You are probably right...BUT

It is time for us to tell her to STFU and put her in her place. She is blowing it for us for 2008.
WHAT A BUNCH OF LOSERS!

[Beelzebud]

9. The more time goes one, the more i'm convinced there is complicity from both parties.

Sure there ARE good Democratic politicians who really are Democrats. However, we DO have a large section of our elected Dems that are complicit with everything the Republicans do.

[L. Coyote]

10. BULLSHIT ALERT III: Here we go again. Bashing Pelosi because BUSH is a liar and a criminal.

What a crock. Don't you read your own threads? Or, do you just repeat your DEM bash BS in a new one when you are called on this crap?

You writing, "step down because of the loss of people's trust in her because of the Wapo article" is like saying "Impeach Clinton because the Rs say so."

Pelosi has lost nothing from the WA Post article. The WA Post has lost credibility, and stinks of a propaganda organ, and not a very clever one either.

You sir, are a dealer in extraordinary horse puckey. Here is what you seem to have missed, or in your zeal to bash Pelosi, have so completely ignores as you extended your false inferences, exageratted hyperbole, and flat out lies like "a "made person" for the GOP":

===============
WilliamPitt Sun Dec-09-07 12:22 AM - 29. BULLSHIT ALERT: "Bipartisan group, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, did not object..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2432579&mesg_id=2433003

What's wrong here...

Front page WaPo:

Lawmakers Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002: Bipartisan group, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, did not object to CIA's interrogation tactics during a virtual tour of overseas detention sites.

a) WaPo arguing "It's OK"

b) "...including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi..."...um...2002? Who was Speaker then? Seems like this headline is trying to conflate her current status with 2002-oriented decisions...how does a minority CA Rep. approve of 2002-era torture tactics? Why would the GOP back then even have bothered to ask her opinion or seek her approval? They wouldn't, and didn't.

Pssst...she wasn't Speaker in 2002. That was Hastert.

This is the WaPo trying to pretend that today is the same as 2002.

Don't let them.

===============
L. Coyote Sun Dec-09-07 12:42 AM - 45. BULLSHIT ALERT: This story is not what it is presented as. Just the opposite.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2432022&mesg_id=2433031

This is a propaganda piece, probably engineered to aid a cover-up of CIA failing to comply with the law and fully informing Congress of their war crimes. Now, that is easy to believe!

Read the whole story before you buy the bullshit Pelosi bashing. Excerpts:

Pelosi declined to comment directly on her reaction to the classified briefings. But a congressional source familiar with Pelosi's position on the matter said the California lawmaker did recall discussions about enhanced interrogation. The source said Pelosi recalls that techniques described by the CIA were still in the planning stage -- they had been designed and cleared with agency lawyers but not yet put in practice -- and acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time.

In a rare public statement last month that broached the subject of his classified objections, Feingold complained about administration claims of congressional support, saying that it was "not the case" that lawmakers briefed on the CIA's program "have approved it or consented to it."

=================
L. Coyote Sat Dec-08-07 11:31 PM - 25. PROPAGANDA ALERT: "it is unclear precisely what members were told about waterboarding and how ..."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2432579&mesg_id=2432904

This is a non-story being turned into a Dem bash on DU.

Shameful how propaganda is so effective--who needs Rs when the DU crowd wants to bring down the leaders!

[gaiilonfong]

11. Don't agree

She admited that she was briefed in 2004!!!

[kentuck]

13. maybe this will get her attention?

Impeach or get the hell out of the way!

[shraby]

15. It wasn't my intention to bash anyone..that's

not my style and never has been. What I'm saying is even tho the Wapo article was an obvious hit piece, there just aren't that many thinking people in this world who will see through it...therefore her reputation has been trashed pretty thoroughly. I suggested a solution for her out of this mess if she wants to take it. It would give her an opportunity to be able to tell her side of the story. As it is, she can't under penalty of treason. This is a penalty the White House has no fear of since it has taped her mouth shut good.

[MasonJar]

12. Link to story?

[shraby]

18. Here is the link I posted it last night.

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html>

[KittyWampus]

14. The way I see it, YOU need to come up with some more relevant info about Pelosi

and not base your bullshit on info gotten from two ANONYMOUS officials.

[Occam Bandage]

16. Or, she can do neither, which is what she is going to do.

[MasonJar]

17. I believe that Senator Rockefeller said some time ago that he had

been briefed on the torture techniques and had written to complain, but due to the rules of secrecy had not been able to disclose the procedures and of course that awful Pat Roberts was in charge of the committee and never investigated anything that had to do with GOPers and their crimes.

[shraby]

19. Rockefeller's letter he wrote to object

then put it a copy in his safe concerned the wiretapping.

[Blue-Jay]

20. So...she can either do what you want, or do the OTHER thing you want?

Brilliant!

[shraby]

21. She can and will do what she damn well

pleases. I was just making a suggestion. The perception the wapo gave was that she knew and didn't do anything..nevermind whether she could have or not..they also left the impression that the Dems were the ones who wanted harsher methods. I know better, it's just that there are a lot of people who don't think any deeper than the ink on the paper. Those are the ones she will have to contend with, plus the crap faux news will put out there about it. It's time for Nancy to piss or get off the pot and set the table for the impeachment proceedings. If she doesn't, she will have some rough times ahead.

edited for tpyo

[ronnykmarshall]

22. Loss the peoples trust?

Which peoples are you talking about?

[KharmaTrain]

24. What Part Of Confidential Don't People Here Understand???

In 2002, Pelosi wasn't in leadership...Gephardt was Minority Leader, Bonior was the whip. She was just a committee member who was not just shown testimony, but also sworn to secrecy...that under law she was prevented not only from exposing these crimes, but even to discuss it with anyone. She wasn't alone. Rockefeller wrote a letter and put it in his desk...some good that did. In the post-9/11 world our entire government went into stupid mode...Democrats were either "unpatriotic" or "weak". The Repugnicans controlled both houses and Pelosi and the other Democrats were lucky to get bathroom privilidges.

I want to hear Speaker Pelosi's explanation before I join a lynch mob...and then still won't join it. So the "best defense is a good offense"...then by that measure, you agree she should have kept quiet, cause it was the proper defense at the time.

OK...flame on kids...