Pelosi Releases Statement : I Knew Very Very Little About Waterboarding Detainees

[kpete]

Pelosi: I Knew Very Very Little About Waterboarding Detainees
By Spencer Ackerman - December 10, 2007, 10:00AM

Here's House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) statement about what she knew about CIA's treatment of detainees from her time on the House intelligence committee:

"On one occasion, in the fall of 2002, I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal.

"I had no further briefings on the techniques. Several months later, my successor as Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman, was briefed more extensively and advised the techniques had in fact been employed. It was my understanding at that time that Congresswoman Harman filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred."

.... Pelosi just threw Harman under the bus. It's no secret that the two Californians don't get along. But she didn't need to put the blame on her committee successor in her statement on this controversy.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004862.php

[back2basics909]

1. The point is speaker Pelosi...

.. that Harman at least objected, and you did not.

You should resign.

[madokie]

2. I think what the two women seen or heard is two completely different presentations

not to be confused with one

[L. Coyote]

15. That is a self-defeating idea. The last thing the Dems need to do is resign for Bush's crimes.

It is just beyond absurd to even entertain such a totally derailed idea. Bush should resign for his own crimes.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MuseRider]

3. HOW MUCH do you have to know Nancy?

I know more now than I did before thanks to those who did not stand up and stop this shit. Still, I knew then that it was wrong, that it was outside the Geneva standards. How the fuck much do you need to know to stop this kind of treatment for any living being or just to follow international law?

Love the way she tossed it all into Harman's lap, not that I particularly care about either one of them.

[L. Coyote]

20. WHAT BULLSHIT! Seems you know more about what Pelosi "knew" than even she does.

You are putting words in Pelosi's mouth without regard for truth. I'm reminded of Republicans when DUers go off into the deep BULLSHIT like this.

What is being covered up by you and other bullshit mongers is a crime. You are a party to the crime now. That crime is the Junta's failure to comply with the law requiring that Congress be informed. Pelosi has become the propaganda focus because she is the locus of Bush's crime, she is the one who was not informed fully as required by law.

Here we go, turning the victim of a crime into the guilty who needs to be punished. This is like claiming a rape victim was too attractive, pure BULLSHIT and a political fool's errand. You are a Junta lackey.

[MuseRider]

28. Torture is a crime.

Waterboarding is torture. I don't give a shit who is saying what. That is the basic fact, waterboarding is torture and if she knew about it and went along with it she owns it.

A junta lackey, good one. :hi:

[Ghost in the Machine]

41. Speaking of BULLSHIT, thats about what your post is. You've been on several

of these threads screaming "BULLSHIT" and "WELCOME TO MY IGNORE", but you haven't backed anything up. Then you call someone a "Junta lackey"??? Do *you* work for Pelosi or something? Trying to do some CYA PR? Maybe you should try reading a little better... here...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included future-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

<http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/8/202552/338
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Do you know what a "virtual tour" is? It's an online presentation, complete with PICTURES. Real Estate websites give 'virtual tours' of the insides of homes via slideshows. "Pay to join" websites give free virtual tours of their sites so people can see what they're getting if they join.

Nancy Pelosi states that:
""On one occasion, in the fall of 2002, I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal.

"I had no further briefings on the techniques. Several months later, my successor as Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman, was briefed more extensively and advised the techniques had in fact been employed. It was my understanding at that time that Congresswoman Harman filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred."

So you see, Nancy Pelosi only protested after a Congresswoman from her own state did so and she thought she might be exposed. Pelosi is in serious CYA mode right now. If Pelosi was given a "virtual tour", I doubt very seriously that Congresswoman Harman was "briefed more extensively".

In short, Nancy Pelosi is the "Junta lackey" and enabler of the Bush/Cheney war crimes, NOT posters here on DU. You should go smoke a joint or take a valium or xanax or something and calm down a little bit.

PEACE!

Ghost

[rockybelt]

54. She needs to drink the kool aid

[roguevalley]

55. Since Jane wrote a protest letter right away, it explains Pelosi's

opposition to her being the second in command of the party structure. Jane was the most senior person and should have been given the job. She would have been 'inconvenient' for Pelosi and so she was booted. Pelosi fought that nomination and got Hoyer instead. Now we know why.

[IsItJustMe]

45. Seems like quit a few folk fly off the handle here before they even read the post or know the facts.

She says "Administration was considering". CONSIDERING is the operative word here.

I am sure that this administration didn't ask Nancy, "So Nancy, what do you think about this?".

I am not a big fan of Palosi, but on this, I really don't get the rage that is being directed at her by "Liberals".

I have to confer with your post.

[leftchick]

52. nancy should know the difference between torture and "technique"

and I am sure she does. This is just another example of her complicity in crimes. She disgusts me.

[bpeale]

4. and just WHO was this person at DOJ? anybody? anybody?

hmmm. could it have been the greatest legal mind of our time? the one who is currently demanding $35,000 for a speaking engagement? maybe the one who was run out of town on a rail? anybody? anybody?

[truebrit71]

5. Bullshit. Simply not good enough Madam Speaker....not good enough by far...

..time for you to go..

[havocmom]

6. When getting briefings from known liars, one is remiss in duty to not seek more info

Somehow, I doubt she just suffers from an astounding lack of curiosity.

[magellan]

7. So Pelosi knew enough in 2003 to concur with Harman's letter of protest

Yet no one yelled public bloody murder about it. Why? Secrecy? Scared of being labeled a traitor?

Disgusting.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. The "Good German" defense? "I didn't know"?

I used to think Pelosi was on the level.

[Marr]

9. Well, now we know why she took impeachment "off the table".

Can't have high profile investigations into things the party establishment were complicit in, can we?

[BuyingThyme]

36. Exactly.

:applause:

[KittyWampus]

10. responses on this thread are what's REALLY disgusting. DU'ers once again enable Bush

just as much as the Democrats they love to trash.

Take the bait, fools. And pat yourselves on the back for being so well informed (sarcasm)

[magellan]

12. The fools are those who continue refusing to hold the Dems to a higher standard

[Marr]

18. I'd say the fools are the ones who keep making excuses for

a party establishment that is at *best* ignoring them.

[fascisthunter]

34. .

[Solly Mack]

11. Wow. Everyone is ADMITTING that the US government tortures (water-boarding)

(and water-boarding IS torture and it's not even the only form of torture my government is guilty of committing)

But NO ONE is being held accountable for these war crimes. (Since 2002 - that's almost 6 years)


The current 'debate' (if one chooses to go that cowardly route) is over who knew what when, how much they knew, and who 'objected' (to war crimes) and when. My country isn't outraged over the war crimes committed and what that says about us as a nation, but is instead engaged in political blame shifting.



My government has become shame.

[bemildred]

14. Yeah, all butt-covering, no outraged demands for accountability. nt

[Solly Mack]

17. I'm considering breaking the law and committing a truly heinous act.

The same people who write memos justifying crimes have advised me that it would be perfectly legal for me to do so. Even though it is well known that the act has always been considered criminal - both by federal and international law.

Any thoughts?

No?

Okies.

[jimshoes]

16. The sad truth Solly

It's not our government any more, it's theirs. They just haven't figured out what to do with us yet. And I'm only half joking.:-(

[Solly Mack]

19. I hear you

[Horse with no Name]

13. Parsing words

I knew very very little...however, you KNEW that something was going on.

[L. Coyote]

21. FACT: Pelosi was briefed that Bush Junta was considering using legal techniques

Pelosi "was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal."

What part of that do the Pelosi bashers fail to understand?
All of it, because they went over the cliff before reading it, apparently!

[L. Coyote]

22. CRIME: Bush Junta was required to accurately inform Pelosi.

Okay, if the Bush Junta committed a crime in not fully informing Pelosi, maybe we should just torture Pelosi on the Internet. I know, we could all gang up on her, call her names, say she is a traitor to democracy and, worse still, to progressive purity, and we could call her out, camp at her house, ask for her resignation.

:sarcasm: YEAH, let's torture the BITCH. TORTURE NANCY, TORTURE NANCY!! :sarcasm:

That is what people are doing, torturing the House Majority Leader because Bush is a criminal.

[EstimatedProphet]

25. Your words are falling on deaf and stupid ears

See, according to some, Pelosi was the one that started the Iraq War. Pelosi stole the 2000 election for Bush. Pelosi was behind the Clinton impeachment too.

[L. Coyote]

32. I will not be part of the Torturing of the House Majority Leader.

I leave that to the junta's minions trolling this forum,
and I will give then their due to no end!!

[Solly Mack]

24. Uh...so you think Bush's DOJ considering a 'technique' legal

means it was legal? Considering the torture memos being written by the DOJ at this time?

Seriously?



Sorry - but Bush was NOT considering legal techniques since water-boarding has NEVER been legal. So if at anytime during that briefing water-boarding was mentioned, then NO ONE can claim they were briefed about 'legal' techniques.

[L. Coyote]

29. NO, I think the Bush junta was lying to Congress, a CRIME.

:sarcasm: So, let's hang Pelosi, who like the rape victim who is "too attractive," is at fault in all this!! :sarcasm:

That is why all this spin is happening. They lied to Pelosi! A CRIME!!!!!!!!

[Solly Mack]

38. I don't know that water-boarding wasn't mentioned during that briefing and neither do you

I don't know that it was either. However, The statement in the OP seems to suggest that it was mentioned as one of the techniques(I knew very very little about water-boarding detainees seems to suggest water-boarding was mentioned - if just a little). If that is the case, then illegal techniques were mentioned in the briefing, as water-boarding has always been illegal. And if water-boarding was mentioned then no one at that briefing can claim it was a case of legal techniques.


I refuse to believe that anyone in Congress is so stupid that they didn't/don't know water-boarding is torture. So when anyone says, 'we want to water-board people' as a means of interrogation, members of Congress should automatically say 'you can't -it's illegal' - and if they don't, then people are very much in the right to question their inaction.


Which isn't to say Bush didn't lie to those members of Congress who attended the briefing - he did. He lied when he said the techniques were legal. They weren't. 2002 was the time of the Bybee torture memo, along with then WH legal counsel, Alberto Gonzales, requesting a legal defense for torture...there is NO legal defense for torture simply because torture is never legal and the DOJ and the CIA claiming it is does not make it so - and no member in Congress has a good enough excuse to not know water-boarding has always been illegal...has always been considered torture.

Now, I don't know if the CIA briefed those members of Congress in detail - ie - naming each and every 'technique' they planned to use 'in the future' (nor do I believe that it wasn't already going on)...if the CIA didn't brief in full then yes, they broke the law by not fully informing Congress. If, however, the CIA did list water-boarding as one of the 'techniques' they planned to put in use, then every single member at that briefing was obligated - by law- (and morality) to object/speak up/speak out/expose.

The Bush administration is guilty of implementing a torture policy. They are war criminals - nothing but. Still, I will not give anyone in government a pass that knew of those plans - even a little - and then didn't object/speak up/speak out/expose.

I don't consider my position unfair or unreasonable.

[magellan]

27. What part of this are you defending?

"It was my understanding at that time that Congresswoman Harman filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred."

Pelosi is admitting she knew enough to realize the techniques were out of line. What did she do about it besides quietly concur with Harman's letter of protest? Did she research it for herself, get independent legal opinion on the matter, speak up when she learned what they were doing was in fact ILLEGAL because oaths of secrecy in government are ethically untenable when being used to cover up a crime?

You DEFEND this behavior?

[L. Coyote]

30. I'm not making false conclusion based on inferences not supported by facts.

Go ahead, have your lynching mob, but I will not be part of that lunacy.

I will scream in protest with no end at such irrationality.

[magellan]

31. It's Pelosi's OWN STATEMENT about what she knew and when

Good God, can't you read?

[L. Coyote]

33. Good God, can't you read?

Pelosi: "was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal."

That is what we know at this time. It does not say what techniques were considered.

All this fill-in-the-blanks with whatever your imagination wants is BULLSHIT and everyone knows it!

[magellan]

37. I read FULLY while you ignore part of her statement

"I had no further briefings on the techniques. Several months later, my successor as Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman, was briefed more extensively and advised the techniques had in fact been employed. It was my understanding at that time that Congresswoman Harman filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred."

She concurred with Harman's 2003 classified letter of protest, that's it. You seem to find this adequate and admirable. I find it sorely lacking in effort, morals and ethics. That goes for ANYONE who knew what was going on and couldn't be bothered to speak up.

[redqueen]

40. Thanks for trying.

Some just do not want to see.

Shame, really. Cause I think that's the majority of Dems... which means things will get worse in this party before they get better. That's IF they get better.

[Annces]

23. No sense of responsibility

The red alarm should have gone off at any hint of torture and she should have acted. These people are like corrupt police officers.

[spanone]

26. more proof the Washington Post is NOT to be believed

[BuyingThyme]

39. It was my understanding that I concurred.

Okay then: It is my understanding that you should shut the fuck up and find a nice, quiet prison cell in which to spend the rest of your days.

[Chomskyite]

42. An extremely weak statement

This statement begs so many questions. She had the chance in fall 2002 to at least leave a record that she made her objections known. She didn't. Did she not object? Why she take seriously the legal counsel of the CIA and Dept Justice (both of whom she needed to realize were under Bush/Cheney's thumbscrews? In the fall of 02, Seymour Hersh's "Stovepiping" story had already run in the New Yorker.

Then she says she had no further briefings. So this means she demanded no further briefings. Then she left it up to her political enemy to file a letter. Is there any record she "concurred" with Harman's letter?

This is dishwater.

[Blackhatjack]

43. Pelosi better be 100% accurate in this statement or bigger problems will emerge...

Even so this statement fails to address the key fact --when Pelosi learned about the 'more extensive' techniques, and when the techniques 'had in fact been employed.'

The recitation that Harman filed a letter in early 2003 does not indicate when Pelosi 'concurred' with it.

[Joe Fields]

44. Everyone has the plausible deniability game down to a fine art.

Even our "illustrious" and oh so effective Speaker.

What a crock of shit. Fucking pompous windbag.

[cherokeeprogressive]

46. My Take

nancy pelosi is a FUCKING LIAR who would do or say anything possible to ensure her re-election and furtherance of her career as a Government Employee.

Great benefits
Unbelievable pension
Connections that will make you rich beyond the belief of the Average American.

Who wouldn't sell their souls for that in this day and age? Many would NOT, but she's cut from a different cloth.

Liar. Opportunist.

Just ONE example of who my fellow Californians (those legally allowed to vote anyway) would choose to represent them.

Liar. Opportunist. Career Politician. Nothing more, nothing less.

[sojourner]

47. how's that throwing harman under the bus? gave her props for protesting use of WB, looks like

and tried to give herself credit for "concurring".

[Tom Joad]

48. it looks like Pelosi just confessed.

[Azathoth]

49. I think we're starting to learn why impeachment is "off the table" n/t

{On edit, someone already beat me to it}

[deacon]

50. Why should she be believed? She also said she would get us out if Iraq.

She has no business being speaker of the house. She is dragging the party down.

[lovuian]

51. Get a good look Congress

if you participate and encourage Torture your going to go down with it

[deacon]

53. Another thing too is that if she didn't cave on iraq (and will again) maybe we could believe her.

But not anymore. She has zero credibility.

[ProSense]

56. You know what's really funny: Pelosi's statement doesn't say anything about waterboarding

See!

Full statement