Nancy Pelosi is toast..

[JoeChalupa]

I watched Nancy Pelosi's news conference and she said the CIA lied to her. I may be a democrat but she is causing major damage with her pie hole.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Pelosi_Bush_briefers_lied_to_me.html

Pelosi: Bush briefers lied to me

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Bush administration intelligence officials told her explicitly they weren't using waterboarding on terror detainees during a Sept. 2002 briefing on interrogation tactics -- months after they had begun waterboarding Abu Zabaydah.

Pelosi also called on CIA director Leon Panetta to release full details on her briefing -- and shook her head in the affirmative when asked if the administration had actually "lied" to her.

"The only mention of waterboarding in the briefing was that it was not being employed," she told reporters, reading from a prepared statement -- twice for emphasis.

The intelligence briefers gave Pelosi, she said, "inaccurate and incomplete information."

"Perhaps they should release the briefing-- I would be very happy if they released the briefing," Pelosi added.

Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking member on the House Intelligence committee has already made a similar request.


Yoniwhore is going to love this.

[FaithInOne]

You shut your damned mouth Joe!

[clambake]

well, for the record, i haven't heard anyone being a fan of pelosi.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If she's lying the voters will make her accountable. If they keep re electing her then conservatives need to shut up because no matter what they say or do it all comes down to who her district wants to represent them. Of course Yoni has no basis to bitch unless he lives in her district.

[Spurminator]

If she's lying the voters will make her accountable. If they keep re electing her then conservatives need to shut up because no matter what they say or do it all comes down to who her district wants to represent them. Of course Yoni has no basis to bitch unless he lives in her district.

If she's lying she should be forced to step down.

[JoeChalupa]

You shut your damned mouth Joe!

:lol I wouldn't vote for her again but that is just me.

[JoeChalupa]

If she's lying she should be forced to step down.

I concur.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If she's lying she should be forced to step down.

forced by who?

[Spurminator]

forced by who?

Her peers.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Her peers.

They can try and force her out but I believe it is her decision to. Don't get me wrong I have never been a big fan of Nancy Pelosi but she does not have to step down even if her peers want her to.

[Spurminator]

With enough pressure it will happen. Look at Trent Lott. And that was just because he kissed an old racist's ass on his birthday.

[George Gervin's Afro]

With enough pressure it will happen. Look at Trent Lott. And that was just because he kissed an old racist's ass on his birthday.

I don't like her much anyway so it does not really matter to me either way.

[Extra Stout]

They can try and force her out but I believe it is her decision to. Don't get me wrong I have never been a big fan of Nancy Pelosi but she does not have to step down even if her peers want her to.
They absolutely can take away her Speakership.

In order to take away her seat, she would have to be impeached. I doubt that would happen, but if she is lying about this, I cannot believe she would be allowed to continue as Speaker.

[George Gervin's Afro]

They absolutely can take away her Speakership.

In order to take away her seat, she would have to be impeached. I doubt that would happen, but if she is lying about this, I cannot believe she would be allowed to continue as Speaker.

Got it. Let them strip her of her post anyway because she has been a horrible Speaker of the House.

[DarkReign]

Pelosi represents everything thats wrong with the Democratic party. The sooner the next Speaker is put in position, the better.

With that said, who would be in line for her job?

[step up to the mike]

With that said, who would be in line for her job?


http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/10/large_joe-the-plumber.jpg

[JoeChalupa]

Pelosi represents everything thats wrong with the Democratic party. The sooner the next Speaker is put in position, the better.

With that said, who would be in line for her job?

Does Cheney represent everything that is wrong with the republican party?
The Democratic party is strong because of Obama, IMO, the problem with the Republicans is they currently don't have a "superstar" as Joe Scarborough puts right now.

[EVAY]

Got it. Let them strip her of her post anyway because she has been a horrible Speaker of the House.

ABSOLUTELY!!!! How can we help get this done?

[byrontx]

It would be better for the President if Pelosi were gone. She is a bit of an idiot.

[jack sommerset]

Speaker of the House, officially known as the Speaker for the United States House of Representatives, is truly the highest honor in which you can directly represent the people of the United States. The Speaker of the House is elected by other members to preside over the house and carry out many other legislative, administrative and political duties.

The democrats could have put someone else in but Pelosi best represents them. They are as guilty as her especially Obama.

[EVAY]

Speaker of the House, officially known as the Speaker for the United States House of Representatives, is truly the highest honor in which you can directly represent the people of the United States. The Speaker of the House is elected by other members to preside over the house and carry out many other legislative, administrative and political duties.

The democrats could have put someone else in but Pelosi best represents them. They are as guilty as her especially Obama.

Do you have any idea how little sense that last sentence makes?

[ducks]

Pelosi is an idiot
she and the so called president will get into it
I do not like both of them

[jack sommerset]

Do you have any idea how little sense that last sentence makes?


They elected her. She is the best of the best in that party. They are all guilty.

[ducks]

she is useless

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Speaker of the House, officially known as the Speaker for the United States House of Representatives, is truly the highest honor in which you can directly represent the people of the United States. The Speaker of the House is elected by other members to preside over the house and carry out many other legislative, administrative and political duties.

The democrats could have put someone else in but Pelosi best represents them. They are as guilty as her especially Obama.

You don't know jack shit so STFU.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Speaker of the House, officially known as the Speaker for the United States House of Representatives, is truly the highest honor in which you can directly represent the people of the United States. The Speaker of the House is elected by other members to preside over the house and carry out many other legislative, administrative and political duties.

The democrats could have put someone else in but Pelosi best represents them. They are as guilty as her especially Obama.

She doesn't represent all democrats. don't be stupid.

[George Gervin's Afro]

They elected her. She is the best of the best in that party. They are all guilty.

so are all republicans guilty and resposiblefor the unuecessary war in Iraq? I mean after all they did vote for the guy who started it.

Are you really this stupid?

[jack sommerset]

so are all republicans guilty and resposiblefor the unuecessary war in Iraq? I mean after all they did vote for the guy who started it.

Are you really this stupid?

So did the Democrats vote for the war. Are you really that STUPID. GOD give me a fucking break. This will piss you off fag, we should have attacked Iraq and I don't see Obama doing a damn thing to get them out.

[EVAY]

They elected her. She is the best of the best in that party. They are all guilty.

Jack, you really might receive a little more credibility on this board if your positions were less sweeping. "They"...referring to all democrats? No. Only the democrats in the district in California voted for her to represent them. The democratic representatives in the House elected her the Speaker, but that election says absolutely nothing about their beliefs about her credibility on the issue at hand. Obama, never having voted in California nor having ever been a member of the House, ever voted for Pelosi for anything.

I am not a democrat. I cannot ABIDE Pelosi for any number of reasons, including her assinine position on this issue. But your comments do not add to the debate.

[jack sommerset]

You don't know jack shit so STFU.


:lol I know Pelosi is the leader. Do you know what the Speaker of the House means and how you become Speaker of the House. When you do come back, say "sorry, I am a dildo and I should STFU"

[jack sommerset]

Jack, you really might receive a little more credibility on this board if your positions were less sweeping. "They"...referring to all democrats? No. Only the democrats in the district in California voted for her to represent them. The democratic representatives in the House elected her the Speaker, but that election says absolutely nothing about their beliefs about her credibility on the issue at hand. Obama, never having voted in California nor having ever been a member of the House, ever voted for Pelosi for anything.

I am not a democrat. I cannot ABIDE Pelosi for any number of reasons, including her assinine position on this issue. But your comments do not add to the debate.

GAWD....get over yourself.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Jack, you really might receive a little more credibility on this board if your positions were less sweeping. "They"...referring to all democrats? No. Only the democrats in the district in California voted for her to represent them. The democratic representatives in the House elected her the Speaker, but that election says absolutely nothing about their beliefs about her credibility on the issue at hand. Obama, never having voted in California nor having ever been a member of the House, ever voted for Pelosi for anything.

I am not a democrat. I cannot ABIDE Pelosi for any number of reasons, including her assinine position on this issue. But your comments do not add to the debate.

Intellectual honesty is not jack's strong suit.

[George Gervin's Afro]

So did the Democrats vote for the war. Are you really that STUPID. GOD give me a fucking break. This will piss you off fag, we should have attacked Iraq and I don't see Obama doing a damn thing to get them out.

The president made the decision. you do know that right dummy?

[JoeChalupa]

intellectual honesty is not jack's strong suit.

+1000

[jack sommerset]

The president made the decision. you do know that right dummy?

Who gave him the power dummy? Congress. Some of you fuckers just keep coming with the excuses. Just like old hag Pelosi saying she had no idea our country waterboarded to get information.

"The Iraq WAR Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 ) is a joint resolution (i.e., a law) passed by the United States CONGRESS in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War."

[RobinsontoDuncan]

Pelosi represents everything thats wrong with the Democratic party. The sooner the next Speaker is put in position, the better.

With that said, who would be in line for her job?

I'm not critiquing your statement here, but I'm wondering if you could clarify a bit. I never understood why people hate Pelosi soooo much, i can't really think of anything she has done to justify it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Who gave him the power dummy? Congress. Some of you fuckers just keep coming with the excuses. Just like old hag Pelosi saying she had no idea our country waterboarded to get information.

"The Iraq WAR Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 ) is a joint resolution (i.e., a law) passed by the United States CONGRESS in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War."

Hey dummy they voted for authorization to use Military force if necessary..was it necessary dummy? So now are you telling me that Congress made the President go to war dummy? Did the president have to authorize the use of force irregardless of the resolution? yes. If they voted no on the resolution could the president ignore that? yes.. don't be stupid.

[jack sommerset]

Hey dummy they voted for authorization to use Military force if necessary..was it necessary dummy? So now are you telling me that Congress made the President go to war dummy? Did the president have to authorize the use of force irregardless of the resolution? yes. If they voted no on the resolution could the president ignore that? yes.. don't be stupid.

Yes dummy, it was dummy,read again dummy, if you need ur partner to help explain dummy go get him.

"The Iraq WAR Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 ) is a joint resolution (i.e., a law) passed by the United States CONGRESS in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War."

This was a law that congress voted on dummy. The chance of war was high dummy. Bush could not attack Canada,Mexico,France,Germany or any other country dummy. This power was given to Bush only for Iraq dummy. Congress knew there was a VERY good chance he would use the power they gave him dummy and guess what dummy? He used it. And as time passes it looks like they all made the right decsion dummy.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yes dummy, it was dummy,read again dummy, if you need ur partner to help explain dummy go get him.

"The Iraq WAR Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 ) is a joint resolution (i.e., a law) passed by the United States CONGRESS in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War."

This was a law that congress voted on dummy. The chance of war was high dummy. Bush could not attack Canada,Mexico,France,Germany or any other country dummy. This power was given to Bush only for Iraq dummy. Congress knew there was a VERY good chance he would use the power they gave him dummy and guess what dummy? He used it. And as time passes it looks like they all made the right decsion dummy.


Ok I accept your apology. The resolution was to use force if necessary. The chance for war wasn't high you moron. Bush could have attacked anybody he wanted to :lmao with or without a resolution.. stop digging a deeper hole dummy.

[JoeChalupa]

jack cracks me up. :lmao

[jack sommerset]

Ok I accept your apology. The resolution was to use force if necessary. The chance for war wasn't high you moron. Bush could have attacked anybody he wanted to :lmao with or without a resolution.. stop digging a deeper hole dummy.

What hole are you talking about? Read the LAW again congress passed. It does not say ANYBODY. It says Iraq. Please tell me where that law says anyone? I am begging you to read again. Here I will post it again for you.

"The Iraq WAR Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 ) is a joint resolution (i.e., a law) passed by the United States CONGRESS in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing the Iraq War."

Where does it say anybody?

Apology....WTF are you talking about? Are you stupid? Do you just make up shit. You call me a moron yet you think I apologized to you. Weird man.

You are saying the chance of war was not high? Thats wrong. Thats silly wrong. You might be the only dumbass on the planet that thought congress passed this law for the sake of passing it. But again you think it says a president can declare war on any country. :blah

[clambake]

that was a nice apology, jack. :thumbsup

[FaithInOne]

She's been framed I tells ya!

[jack sommerset]

34ag4nkSh7Q&feature=related

[angrydude]

I'm not critiquing your statement here, but I'm wondering if you could clarify a bit. I never understood why people hate Pelosi soooo much, i can't really think of anything she has done to justify it.


Because BEFORE she was speaker of the house she was already one of the right's favorite liberal punching bags I guess because of things she said.

Cynthia McKinney too, but I think she hit a policeman or something and isn't in Congress anymore.

[MiamiHeat]

Pelosi is a dumb bitch. I have written her off ever since she won that position and uttered the words

"Impeachment is off the table"

[Nbadan]

pelosi is a dumb bitch. I have written her off ever since she won that position and uttered the words

"impeachment is off the table"

+1000

[Yonivore]

:corn: :corn: :corn: :corn:

I think this is going to be an interesting week in politics...

Steny Hoyer is already measuring for new drapes and a mahogany desk.

[baseline bum]

Fuck that cunt. She's the Democrat answer to Cheney.

[Yonivore]

Exclusive: Nancy Pelosi's Address to CIA Employees (http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/05/exclusive-nancy-pelosis-address-to-cia.html)


Junior Cub Reporter Biff Spackle secured an exclusive copy of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's speech to CIA employees.


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_orkXxp0bhEA/SgzJSP_5rUI/AAAAAAAASbM/YI0gIkeGLJs/s400/090514-pelosi6.jpg


People, we live in a world that has rules and those rules need to be enforced by Members of Congress and their staffers . Who's gonna do it? You? You, DCI Panetta? I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom.

You weep for the victims of 9/11 and curse the terrorists; you have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that those victims' deaths, while tragic, probably saved lives and that my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves terrorists from illegal torture.

You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties you want me in Congress, you need me in Congress.

We use words like tax, spend, entitlement and "investment". We use them as the backbone of a life trying to keep our power. You use them as a punchline.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to men and women who rise and sleep under the blanket of the very money I provide and then question the manner in which I provide it.

I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a ballot and cast a vote. Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you are entitled to.
We can't handle the truth.

[jack sommerset]

Exclusive: Nancy Pelosi's Address to CIA Employees (http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2009/05/exclusive-nancy-pelosis-address-to-cia.html)

Thats funny!

[hope4dopes]

Hey dummy they voted for authorization to use Military force if necessary..was it necessary dummy? So now are you telling me that Congress made the President go to war dummy? Did the president have to authorize the use of force irregardless of the resolution? yes. If they voted no on the resolution could the president ignore that? yes.. don't be stupid.


And then they all voted over and over to fund it.

[hope4dopes]

Fuck that cunt. She's the Democrat answer to Cheney.

AH.. then can we trust this adminsistration anymore than the last one.

[jack sommerset]

And then they all voted over and over to fund it.

He does not get any of that. He has been brainwashed. "Bush bad, war bad"! dum de dum,dum de dum..."Bush bad"

[MiamiHeat]

Oh well

I didn't vote for Obama.

[Yonivore]

Ok I accept your apology. The resolution was to use force if necessary.
With the determination of necessity left to the Executive.


The chance for war wasn't high you moron. Bush could have attacked anybody he wanted to :lmao with or without a resolution.. stop digging a deeper hole dummy.
Not without the funding Congress approved and continued to approve and, by the way, continues to approve.

[JoeChalupa]

Oh well

I didn't vote for Obama.

I did

[Yonivore]

I did
And, how does that make you feel?

[JoeChalupa]

And, how does that make you feel?

Makes me feel great. No regrets at all. Not defeated like you must have been when your guy lost.

[hope4dopes]

Makes me feel great. No regrets at all. Not defeated like you must have been when your guy lost.

that's your standard of victory? your guy won, I don't know if anyone's told you but this isn't an American Idol episode.

[JoeChalupa]

that's your standard of victory? your guy won, I don't know if anyone's told you but this isn't an American Idol episode.

Standard of victory? No shit..it was an election and not AI. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

:lol

What else would the "standard of victory" if not actually winning?

[MiamiHeat]

:lol

What else would the "standard of victory" if not actually winning?

wow, chumpy doesn't even get it

that makes 2 with a shallow standard of victory

[ChumpDumper]

:lol again.

If we're just talking elections, what else could it be?

Please explain yourself.

[JoeChalupa]

wow, chumpy doesn't even get it

that makes 2 with a shallow standard of victory

Okay, explain it to me young wise one. Don't get upset because of your shallow defeat.

[JoeChalupa]

http://www.bartcop.com/pelosi-knew2.jpg

[George Gervin's Afro]

And then they all voted over and over to fund it.

what other choice did they have? abandon the troops? Need I remind you that they aren't the ones who ordered them there without sufficient supplies to begin with with. As Rmmy so elequently stated "we had to go with the military we had, not the one we wished for". So are you saying the dems should have abandon the troops during a time of war skippy?

Why do you and jack hate the military so much?

[DarrinS]

Let's say you are a liberal "activist". What are you hoping to accomplish by screaming "war criminal" at someone? I didn't see anyone arresting Rumsfeld, so I guess it's not working.


Also, when did it become the norm on college campuses to shout down conservative speakers, vs debating them on issues? I guess if you can't win based on ideas, you just have to drown them out with noise.

[JoeChalupa]

Let's say you are a liberal "activist". What are you hoping to accomplish by screaming "war criminal" at someone? I didn't see anyone arresting Rumsfeld, so I guess it's not working.


Also, when did it become the norm on college campuses to shout down conservative speakers, vs debating them on issues? I guess if you can't win based on ideas, you just have to drown them out with noise.

That goes both ways.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Let's say you are a liberal "activist". What are you hoping to accomplish by screaming "war criminal" at someone? I didn't see anyone arresting Rumsfeld, so I guess it's not working.


Also, when did it become the norm on college campuses to shout down conservative speakers, vs debating them on issues? I guess if you can't win based on ideas, you just have to drown them out with noise.

What ideas are you referring to? These aren't the same ones that we have had for the last 8 years? The same one's that America overwhelmingly rejected the last 2 election cycles? Are these ideas working for you?

[Winehole23]

Let's say you are a liberal "activist". What are you hoping to accomplish by screaming "war criminal" at someone? I didn't see anyone arresting Rumsfeld, so I guess it's not working.I don't see Rummy taking any vacations in Spain, so there must be something to it.



Also, when did it become the norm on college campuses to shout down conservative speakers, vs debating them on issues? I guess if you can't win based on ideas, you just have to drown them out with noise.Normal on college campuses for a long time, and hardly limited to braindead lefties.

[DarrinS]

Posted in wrong thread. My bad.

[DarrinS]

But, going back to Pelosi, it is interesting that she brought up WMD in Iraq and then says that this whole CIA briefing thing is a "diversionary tactic". I don't now how she said all that with a straight face.

[Winehole23]

Bob Graham says the CIA fudged the dates (http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/14/senator-says-cia-made-up-dates-of-torture-briefings-then-admitted-it/) of the briefings, and Leon Panetta refuses to vouch (http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/2009-05-06-reyes-eit-letter0001.pdf) for the accuracy of the released summaries.

[jack sommerset]

Thomas Jefferson said, “to lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."

[Winehole23]

How are we losing our country by adhering to the law, Jack? You really think terrorists can defeat the USA?

[clambake]

winehole......you just haven't embraced the fear.

come over to our side.

[George Gervin's Afro]

How are we losing our country by adhering to the law, Jack? You really think terrorists can defeat the USA?


jack is trying to tell us that the ends justify the means.

[Yonivore]

Leon Panetta refuses to vouch (http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/2009-05-06-reyes-eit-letter0001.pdf) for the accuracy of the released summaries.
Not anymore...

He calls bullshit (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/cia-director-fires-back-at-pelosi-2009-05-15.html) on Pelosi's attempt to paint the CIA as a bunch of lying liars who lie.


Panetta, President Obama's pick to run the clandestine agency, wrote in a memo to CIA employees Friday that "CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing 'the enhanced techniques that had been employed,'" according to CIA records.

"We are an agency of high integrity, professionalism and dedication," Panetta said in the memo. "Our task is to tell it like it is—even if that’s not what people always want to hear. Keep it up. Our national security depends on it."

[Yonivore]

jack is trying to tell us that the ends justify the means.
If the ends are extracting actionable intelligence that will save innocent American lives and the means are the enhanced interrogation techniques; I agree.

[ElNono]

If the ends are extracting actionable intelligence that will save innocent American lives and the means are the enhanced interrogation techniques; I agree.

Until, of course, somebody suspects you are a terrorist and said 'enhanced interrogation techniques' are applied to you. Then you'll bitch and whine how is it possible that the land of the free turned into a Nazi camp (and most likely blame it on the Democrats).

[Yonivore]

Until, of course, somebody suspects you are a terrorist and said 'enhanced interrogation techniques' are applied to you. Then you'll bitch and whine how is it possible that the land of the free turned into a Nazi camp (and most likely blame it on the Democrats).
Well, if I was a know associate of a group of terrorists that had just killed 3,000 of my citizens, caused billions of dollars of physical damage, and tens of billions more in economic strife; and there is no argument these three individuals were that, I'd probably expect to have information extracted from me in whatever manner they deemed appropriate.

At that point, I'd count myself as lucky that it was the United States of America and not any other country in the world, doing the interrogations.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Be careful for what you wish, Cindy Sheehan is waiting to take her seat. The voters in her district will go farther left, and not the other way around.

[JoeChalupa]

Until, of course, somebody suspects you are a terrorist and said 'enhanced interrogation techniques' are applied to you. Then you'll bitch and whine how is it possible that the land of the free turned into a Nazi camp (and most likely blame it on the Democrats).

:lmao Yoniwhore would crack if you threw a water balloon at his ass.

[Yonivore]

Be careful for what you wish, Cindy Sheehan is waiting to take her seat. The voters in her district will go farther left, and not the other way around.
I'd love to see Cindy Sheehan in the U. S. Congress, representing the people of San Francisco. That would be perfect.

[Yonivore]

:lmao Yoniwhore would crack if you threw a water balloon at his ass.
I'd probably crack like Khalid Sheik Mohammed but, that's not really the point here, is it?

[JohnnyMarzetti]

I'd probably crack like Khalid Sheik Mohammed but, that's not really the point here, is it?

The only point you have is still up Bush's ass.

[ChumpDumper]

I'd probably crack like Khalid Sheik Mohammed but, that's not really the point here, is it?If he cracked in 30 seconds, why did he have to be waterboarded 183 times?

[Yonivore]

If he cracked in 30 seconds, why did he have to be waterboarded 183 times?
He wasn't waterboarded 183 times...and, once you have some information, verify it, it could lead to more questions and, more interrogation.

I believe they said he underwent 5 waterboarding sessions.

[clambake]

are you saying it would be bad to waterboard someone 183 times?

[Yonivore]

are you saying it would be bad to waterboard someone 183 times?
No. I'm not saying that.

[clambake]

is 5 times better?

[ChumpDumper]

He wasn't waterboarded 183 times...and, once you have some information, verify it, it could lead to more questions and, more interrogation.

I believe they said he underwent 5 waterboarding sessions.If you were kicked in the groin 183 times in five sessions, how many times would you believe you were kicked in the groin?

[Yonivore]

If you were kicked in the groin 183 times in five sessions, how many times would you believe you were kicked in the groin?
If your barber cuts your hair using 183 passes of the clippers, how many haircuts did you get?

If a firing squad shoots 10 bullets into your heart, how many times are you executed?

[ChumpDumper]

If a firing squad shoots 10 bullets into your heart, how many times are you executed?If you were shot ten times -- how many times were you shot?

[Yonivore]

If you were shot ten times -- how many times were you shot?
You were shot ten times in order to be executed...just like KSM had water poured on his face multiple times, during each waterboarding session.

Each pour doesn't constitute an individual waterboarding session anymore than each pass with the clippers constitutes a haircut.

Why are you arguing this? I'm not particularly disturbed by the prospect of him being waterboarded 183 times either.

[ChumpDumper]

You were shot ten times in order to be executed...just like KSM had water poured on his face multiple times, during each waterboarding session.Having a bullet enter your body is being shot.

Having water poured on your face is being waterboarded.


Why are you arguing this? I'm not particularly disturbed by the prospect of him being waterboarded 183 times either.Then why are you arguing this? Why try to downplay the numbers? Say he was waterboarded 183 times with pride if it doesn't bother you.

[jack sommerset]

Several platoons of American soldiers are being shipped from USA to Iraq where they will try to stop terror and help free the Iraqi people. The soldiers in each platoon needs to be divided equally among 3, 4, 5, or 7 squads. What is the least number of soldiers that each squad can have?

[Yonivore]

Having a bullet enter your body is being shot.

Having water poured on your face is being waterboarded.

Then why are you arguing this? Why try to downplay the numbers? Say he was waterboarded 183 times with pride if it doesn't bother you.
Because it's not accurate. Why not count the number drops in each pour and say he was waterboarded a bazillion times?

[ChumpDumper]

Because it's not accurate. Why not count the number drops in each pour and say he was waterboarded a bazillion times?That would be inaccurate.

He was waterboarded 183 times.

[MannyIsGod]

Its pretty sad when the justifications for torture used by Yoni boil down to his twisting semantics in any way he can towards his side. If that doesn't show you how flimsy the ground you stand on is well nothing will.

[ChumpDumper]

No shit.

Look at this first story that Yoni keeps parroting:


The al Qaeda mastermind, known as KSM, stubbornly held out for about two minutes -- far longer than any of the other "high-value" terror targets who were subjected to the technique, the harshest from a list of six techniques approved for use by the CIA and Bush administration lawyers, sources said.

Then KSM started talking, in idiomatic English he learned as a high school foreign exchange student and polished at a North Carolina college in the 1980s, sources said.

"It was an extraordinary amount of time for him to hold out," one former CIA officer told ABCNews.com. "A red-headed female supervisor was in the room when he was being water-boarded. It was humiliating to him. So he held out."

"Then he started talking, and he never stopped," this former officer said. KSM was never water-boarded again, and in hours and hours of conversation with his interrogators, often over a cup of tea, he poured out his soul and the murderous deeds he committed. http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/09/how-the-cia-bro.html

Two minutes?

That's barely enough time to be waterboarded once if the claimed methods were used.

Is this the story you are sticking with, Yoni?

[Winehole23]

Not anymore...

He calls bullshit (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/cia-director-fires-back-at-pelosi-2009-05-15.html) on Pelosi's attempt to paint the CIA as a bunch of lying liars who lie.I call bullshit on you. Panetta didn't retract his memo saying it's up to Congress to sort out what really happened. He just said his bureau is staffed by professionals who value the truth, and that he has confidence in them to the utmost.

That's what you call a non-denial denial.

[Yonivore]

Its pretty sad when the justifications for torture used by Yoni boil down to his twisting semantics in any way he can towards his side. If that doesn't show you how flimsy the ground you stand on is well nothing will.
I'm not the one playing semantic games. I've already stated I didn't care if it was 183 or 5, it was effective.

If one session required 35 pours and another 17 and another 63 to get the information, so be it.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm not the one playing semantic games. I've already stated I didn't care if it was 183 or 5, it was effective.How effective could it be if it had to be done 183 times after you claimed it only had to be done for only one two minute session before?

[jack sommerset]

Pelosi soon will be out of work because she is a liar.

[Winehole23]

Pelosi soon will be out of work because she is a liar.I thought so too, but Bob Graham's second, plus Panetta's weaselly disclaimer on the the briefing summaries, make this unclear.

[Yonivore]

How effective could it be if it had to be done 183 times after you claimed it only had to be done for only one two minute session before?
You can execute a lot of pouring in one to two minutes. How much water was poured each time? For what duration?

I bet I could pour water over your face 183 times in two minutes.

I'll keep going back to the words of former Vice President Cheney; if we were in the torture business, we would have bother seeking guidance from the Justice Department. I'll go one further. We also wouldn't have bothered with meticulously documenting the sessions -- such as how many fucking times we poured water on their face during a waterboarding session.

[Yonivore]

I thought so too, but Bob Graham's second,...
Bob Graham is trying, that's true but, Pelosi's made enemies in the Democrat party, not least of which is Harman.


... plus Panetta's weaselly disclaimer on the the briefing summaries, make this unclear.
Panetta's thrown her under the bus today.

Panetta to CIA employees: We told Pelosi the truth (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Panetta_to_CIA_employees_We_told_Pelosi_the_truth. html?showall)

If she's lost Panetta, Graham isn't going to do her much good.

Note also that Rockefeller is awful quiet.

[Winehole23]

I'll keep going back to the words of former Vice President Cheney; if we were in the torture business, we would have bother seeking guidance from the Justice Department.Charles Duelfer and Lawrence Wilkerson confirm that waterborading was ordered before any legal opinion was sought, to establish operational links between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

[Yonivore]

And, the White House is trying to wash its hands of the whole affair, too.

[Yonivore]

Charles Duelfer and Lawrence Wilkerson confirm that waterborading was ordered before any legal opinion was sought, to establish operational links between Al Qaeda and Iraq.
And?

[Winehole23]

This is somewhat contrary to your citation above, that EIT were regularized and that appropriate legal guidance was sought.

[Yonivore]

This is somewhat contrary to your citation above, that EIT were regularized and that appropriate legal guidance was sought.
And, I'm okay with that. It appears the prior use (taking your claim at face value) was okay under the guidance.

[Winehole23]

And, I'm okay with that. It appears the prior use (taking your claim at face value) was okay under the guidance.How generous of you. You demand others cite and conform to law, but for yourself the eyeball test is good enough. You're such a bullshitter.

[Yonivore]

How generous of you. You demand others cite and conform to law, but for yourself the eyeball test is good enough. You're such a bullshitter.
Under these circumstances, absolutely.

[Yonivore]

Pelosi changes her story (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Panetta_to_CIA_employees_We_told_Pelosi_the_truth. html)...again...


"We all share great respect for the dedicated men and women of the intelligence community who are deeply committed to the safety and security of the American people. My criticism of the manner in which the Bush Administration did not appropriately inform Congress is separate from my respect for those in the intelligence community who work to keep our country safe. What is important now is to be united in our commitment to ensuring the security of our country; that, and how Congress exercises its oversight responsibilities, will continue to be my focus as we move forward."
So, did the CIA lie to you in the 2002 briefing or not?

I think she realized how back she fucked up yesterday but, this doesn't even come close to explaining the original question of the 2002 briefing and what she knew and when she knew it.

She's just trying to put the CIA dogs back on the chain now.

:corn:

[George Gervin's Afro]

Pelosi changes her story (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Panetta_to_CIA_employees_We_told_Pelosi_the_truth. html)...again...


So, did the CIA lie to you in the 2002 briefing or not?

I think she realized how back she fucked up yesterday but, this doesn't even come close to explaining the original question of the 2002 briefing and what she knew and when she knew it.

She's just trying to put the CIA dogs back on the chain now.

:corn:

when did Pelosi say the CIA lied? I see where she stated they misled Congress but haven't seen her claims they lied.

[byrontx]

We need to waterboard Cheney to get to the bottom of this!

[Winehole23]

I'm not the one playing semantic games. I've already stated I didn't care if it was 183 or 5, it was effective.Ends justify the means. This is the way fellow travelers justified Lenin and Stalin.

What, conservatives believe in situational ethics now? Pathetic.

Fuck postmodern conservatives. They got no values. It all gets sacrificed to expediency.

For what? For a bunch of terrrorists who have no chance of beating us.

Fucking bedwetter crybabies. They'd sacrifice our republic to protect us against a bunch of cowards who can't beat us. Not in 1000 years. Fucken doubters. They care more about their own puny existence than American values. Fuck em. They don't know what's worth living and dying for. They can kill Americans, but they can't kill America, unless we lose our fucken minds like Yoni wants us to.

[Yonivore]

when did Pelosi say the CIA lied? I see where she stated they misled Congress but haven't seen her claims they lied.
If you're being accused of misleading, you're being accused of lying.

She was answering a specific question of whether or not the CIA lied to her and she began the answer with, the word, "yes."

[Yonivore]

Ends justify the means. This is the way fellow travelers justified Lenin and Stalin.

What, conservatives believe in situational ethics now? Pathetic.

Fuck postmodern conservatives. They got no values. It all gets sacrificed to expediency.

For what? For a bunch of terrrorists who have no chance of beating us.

Fucking bedwetter crybabies. They'd sacrifice our republic to protect us against a bunch of cowards who can't beat us. Not in 1000 years. Fucken doubters. They care more about their own puny existence than American values. Fuck em. They don't know what's worth living and dying for. They can kill Americans, but they can't kill America, unless we lose our fucken minds like Yoni wants us to.
If the means are legal -- even if they make you uncomfortable -- and the ends are saving thousands of American lives, yep; I'm okay with that.

As it stands now, the Bush administration is saying they've committed no crimes in the interrogations.

I believe them, you don't; no one has proven a crime.

[George Gervin's Afro]

If you're being accused of misleading, you're being accused of lying.

She was answering a specific question of whether or not the CIA lied to her and she began the answer with, the word, "yes."

So if Bush misled us with bad information to the run up of the Iraq war then, by your logic, he lied. OK then Bush is a liar. Still think a liar belongs on Mt Rushmore?

If I am hitting on a chick and she tells me that she will sleep with my if Im not married. She then asks me if I am married and I say no then she bangs me. Of course I have had a girlfriend for almost 10 years and we live together, would that make me a liar? Since she didn't ask me specifically if I had a girlfriend did I lie or mislead her?

You are such a hypocrite.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

If I am hitting on a chick and she tells me that she will sleep with my if Im not married. She then asks me if I am married and I say no then she bangs me. Of course I have had a girlfriend for almost 10 years and we live together, would that make me a liar? Since she didn't ask me specifically if I had a girlfriend did I lie or mislead her?

well you didn't lie. she specifically asked if you had a wife. if that were to happen, it really shows how much of an ass you are because you solely know what your status is. pretty stupid argument.

[Yonivore]

So if Bush misled us with bad
Well, he would have to know the information was "bad."

Yes, I believe the man still belongs on Mt. Rushmore. I also believe the further into history he presidency travels, the more it will be realized just how successful his presidency was.

You all will be laughing stocks. And, Nancy Pelosi appears to be first in line.

[Yonivore]

So, once Nancy Pelosi is definitively proven to have lied about what she was told in CIA briefings, I wonder how long it will be before the rest of her partisan prevarications are noticed...

TyB_ldDMmFE

[George Gervin's Afro]

Well, he would have to know the information was "bad."

Yes, I believe the man still belongs on Mt. Rushmore. I also believe the further into history he presidency travels, the more it will be realized just how successful his presidency was.

You all will be laughing stocks. And, Nancy Pelosi appears to be first in line.

So if Bush knew something was bad but used it anyway, would he have lied? Would you call him a liar?

[Yonivore]

So if Bush knew something was bad but used it anyway, would he have lied? Would you call him a liar?
Yes. If George Bush knew, at the time he said something, that it was wrong, that would be a lie.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yes. If George Bush knew, at the time he said something, that it was wrong, that would be a lie.

Fair enough. I'll file away this post for a rainy day.

[Yonivore]

Fair enough. I'll file away this post for a rainy day.
Oh, I thought you had something.

Okay, file away.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Yes. If George Bush knew, at the time he said something, that it was wrong, that would be a lie.uh, you could also put colin powell in that same category.

[Wild Cobra]

How can anyone count her out? She's not toast. The people who keep voting in are too moronic to care!

[George Gervin's Afro]

uh, you could also put colin powell in that same category.

Absolutely. Of course Powell would have to intended to purposely put forth information he knew not to be true. So yes, if Colin P did this then he is a liar.

Who gave Powell the information? All evidence for the war was ok'd by the Executive branch. I am going to go on a limb and say the Powell didn't gather his own evidence and then manipultae it to start a war he warned against to begin with. Just a hunch

[Yonivore]

How can anyone count her out? She's not toast. The people who keep voting in are too moronic to care!
They don't vote her in as Speaker or give her committee assignments...

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Absolutely. Of course Powell would have to intended to purposely put forth information he knew not to be true. So yes, if Colin P did this then he is a liar.

Who gave Powell the information? All evidence for the war was ok'd by the Executive branch. I am going to go on a limb and say the Powell didn't gather his own evidence and then manipultae it to start a war he warned against to begin with. Just a hunchthen why did he, with a straight face, present it to the public as if it was from the burning bush?

[ChumpDumper]

then why did he, with a straight face, present it to the public as if it was from the burning bush?Are you saying Powell knowingly lied at the direction of Bush?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Are you saying Powell knowingly lied at the direction of Bush?
well everyone states that we went in to iraq for no reason, so.........

[boutons_deux]

"Powell knowingly lied"

Powell's own staff warned him how highly dubious the "mobile weapons lab" "intel" was.

NSA/CIA knew it was bullshit but let Powell spew as hard evidence.

[George Gervin's Afro]

then why did he, with a straight face, present it to the public as if it was from the burning bush?

I would assume he trusted the President.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

I would assume he trusted the President.
so powell's a liar then. case closed.

[Oh, Gee!!]

so powell's a liar then. case closed.


they both lied---powell has pretty much confirmed that much.

[jack sommerset]

What is Pelosi going to do? Will she keep fighting, hope it goes away, quit, keep blaming whoever or new people. This seems to be a subject that most people think she lied.

[Winehole23]

Chances are, in a week or two we'll be talking about something else. Memory dies easy.

[MannyIsGod]

so powell's a liar then. case closed.

Welcome to 2005? This shit isn't new. There's a reason the guy didn't come back for a second term and there is a distinct difference in lying because you are ordered to do so and your sense of duty and lying to advance and agenda.

[ChumpDumper]

well everyone states that we went in to iraq for no reason, so.........


so powell's a liar then. case closed.So you are saying Bush told him to lie and based the entire Iraq war on lies.

Case closed.

[jack sommerset]

Chances are, in a week or two we'll be talking about something else. Memory dies easy.

I don't know about that. It certainly could happen that way but the Republicans want answers (no surprise) the media looks like they are all over it and the Dems seem annoyed by the whole thing plus she keept the story alive by accusing the CIA of lying. I don't see it ending good.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

So you are saying Bush told him to lie and based the entire Iraq war on lies.

Case closed.

you're a work of art. the first quote you posted from me says "everyone", handjob

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Welcome to 2005? This shit isn't new. There's a reason the guy didn't come back for a second term and there is a distinct difference in lying because you are ordered to do so and your sense of duty and lying to advance and agenda.
so was a gun pointed to powell's head when he presented this?..............no need to answer that. like i said before if he wasn't 100% sure on the finding then he should've told them to piss off and resign. if i'm presented with something that i feel isn't on the up and up i'd be asking lots of questions before i'm given that responsibility with presenting it to the people. think if he'd shown some backbone and told that administration to go to hell.

[MannyIsGod]

so was a gun pointed to powell's head when he presented this?..............no need to answer that. like i said before if he wasn't 100% sure on the finding then he should've told them to piss off and resign. if i'm presented with something that i feel isn't on the up and up i'd be asking lots of questions before i'm given that responsibility with presenting it to the people. think if he'd shown some backbone and told that administration to go to hell.

Because people in service of the President regularly tell them to go to hell. Powell is not above criticism for his actions, but there is a reason Truman said the buck stops here. In any event, every account I've read up on the lead up to war paint Powell as a distinct voice in the administration against the action but once the President's mind was made up he did what he could to serve the administration he had agreed to help.

The President made the call, not the Secretary of State.

[George Gervin's Afro]

so was a gun pointed to powell's head when he presented this?..............no need to answer that. like i said before if he wasn't 100% sure on the finding then he should've told them to piss off and resign. if i'm presented with something that i feel isn't on the up and up i'd be asking lots of questions before i'm given that responsibility with presenting it to the people. think if he'd shown some backbone and told that administration to go to hell.

If the President tells me something I would believe him.

[ChumpDumper]

you're a work of art. the first quote you posted from me says "everyone", handjobWhat do you say, rimjob?

[Winehole23]

CIA to Obey: Our records ain't perfect (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/CIA_to_Obey_Our_records_aint_perfect.html)

A CIA spokesman is NOT pushing back on House Appropriations czar David Obey's charge (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Obey_demands_CIA_correction_.html?showall) that its docket of Congressional briefings inaccurately reported that an Obey aide had attended a classified meeting on interrogations.

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano didn't address the veracity of Obey's claim -- only that the agency's records are, essentially, subjective and not culled from recordings or detailed transcripts.


He also admits to "different recollections" on the briefing, which was the gist of Pelosi's claim -- before she said she had been "misled."


Gimigliano: “While CIA’s information has Mr. Juola attending briefings on September 19, 2006 and October 11, 2007, there are different recollections of these events, which Mr. Obey’s letter describes. As the agency has pointed out more than once, its list—compiled in response to congressional requests—reflects the records it has. These are notes, memos, and recollections, not transcripts and recordings.”


Panetta has made this point himself, albeit not as explicitly -- a nuance largely overlooked by Pelosi's GOP critics.



Panetta has said the CIA document was "truthful" to the recollections of CIA officers -- but hasn't vouched for those recollections.

[jack sommerset]

CIA to Obey: Our records ain't perfect (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/CIA_to_Obey_Our_records_aint_perfect.html)

A CIA spokesman is NOT pushing back on House Appropriations czar David Obey's charge (http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Obey_demands_CIA_correction_.html?showall) that its docket of Congressional briefings inaccurately reported that an Obey aide had attended a classified meeting on interrogations.

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano didn't address the veracity of Obey's claim -- only that the agency's records are, essentially, subjective and not culled from recordings or detailed transcripts.


He also admits to "different recollections" on the briefing, which was the gist of Pelosi's claim -- before she said she had been "misled."


Gimigliano: “While CIA’s information has Mr. Juola attending briefings on September 19, 2006 and October 11, 2007, there are different recollections of these events, which Mr. Obey’s letter describes. As the agency has pointed out more than once, its list—compiled in response to congressional requests—reflects the records it has. These are notes, memos, and recollections, not transcripts and recordings.”


Panetta has made this point himself, albeit not as explicitly -- a nuance largely overlooked by Pelosi's GOP critics.



Panetta has said the CIA document was "truthful" to the recollections of CIA officers -- but hasn't vouched for those recollections.


Yada,yada,yada......She learned a lesson. STFU. Hopefully she will remember her lesson. I doubt it though.

[Winehole23]

Yada,yada,yada......She learned a lesson. STFU. Hopefully she will remember her lesson. I doubt it though.You didn't follow the link, did you?

Obey's letter to Panetta points out that the executive summary says the briefing was given by an agent who, by his own recollection, was asked to leave the meeting before it even started.

Sounds like the CIA's homework was a bit sloppy.

BTW, the CIA is being investigated right now for misleading Congress in another case (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/20/cia.coverup.charge/index.html).

I don't really trust Pelosi, but I don't understand why everyone believes the CIA, especially when their own director won't vouch for the content of the summaries.

[FaithInOne]

This thread is bullshit! You're all blasphemers.

http://pursuitcoach.com/blog1/wp-content/uploads/thinking1.jpg

[Winehole23]

^^^Another supercilious, substance-free post from LockBeard.

[jack sommerset]

I thought this was funny and did not want to start a whole new post or dig a old one up so it's here. It's a rant about Pelosi

yHdXIPaD1zo

[Yonivore]

Specter defends Pelosi, questions CIA's honesty (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/new-dem-specter-defends-pelosi-questions-cias-honesty-2009-05-20.html)

Well, somebody's trying to stay relevant...

[George Gervin's Afro]

what would the retards do if it was discovdered that the CIA didn't keep as good of notes as they thought they did..

[Yonivore]

what would the retards do if it was discovdered that the CIA didn't keep as good of notes as they thought they did..
Then they'll just create them...or, so you'll say.

Three Days of the Dodo Bird (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZDc5MWUzMmI5OThjZjdlNmI5NzE4MmRhMGRjMjU4Nzc=)


Not even David Baldacci can make this stuff up.

By David Kahane

So the news is that, over the weekend, I got a call from my agent from his ranch in Montana. “You got the gig,” he said. “Ronnie and Brian read the logline and flipped out: ‘Three Days of the Condor meets The Jerk.’ Sheer genius. Now get to work.” That’s the way good news come these days out here in Hollywood, the land of the instant yes and the interminable no. But when your subject is the CIA versus the Speaker of the House, well — some scripts just write themselves.

As is well known, thrillers are back. Now that the so-called “War on Terror” is officially over, we’re going to close the human-rights atrocity known as Gitmo, and it’s soon going to be payback time for the neo-con lickspittle lawyers who authorized such brutal “enhanced interrogation techniques” as speaking sternly to the holy warriors, we screenwriters have begun to breathe easier. You see, during the evil &*^&BUSH*&^! administration the studios were too afraid that an action picture featuring, you know, “Muslim terrorists” might provoke some enhanced film criticism and so we dug out everybody’s favorite all-purpose villains, neo-Nazi white supremacist Sarah Palin relatives, and did the best we could.

But now . . . well, we still can’t sell scripts about “Muslim terrorists,” but a celebrity death match between the Central Intelligence Agency and the person who stands second to the vice president in the line of succession to the White House should any, you know, unfortunate accident befall the leader of the free world, is right up our alley. Which is why I was first off the mark last week when Nancy D’Alesandro Pelosi, the flower of Baltimore and the pride of San Francisco, accidentally pulled the pin on a live hand grenade in front of the fiercely independent Washington press corps and blew herself up.

She wasn’t trying to, of course. She was trying to explain to a bunch of less-than-enchanted media stenographers who would rather be covering Michelle Obama’s workout, or even Bo the dog’s breakfast, that the nasty, un-American CIA has deliberately “misled” her when discussing just precisely how they were going to insert bamboo shoots under the fingernails of a caterpillar that they would then waterboard and introduce into the cell of some totally innocent mujahedin caught up in the lawless Bush-Cheney dragnet during the hysteria that followed the inside job that was 9/11 and . . .

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

In the other corner we have the Central Intelligence Agency, which we in Tinseltown have been depicting for years as just about the most malevolent organization in the world, outside of the Catholic Church, the Club for Growth, and the Cheney family. In movie after movie, the shadowy CIA guy always wound up as the villain in the last reel. So imagine our surprise when, during the Bushitler interregnum, we discovered that the CIA is on our side, and has been for decades! Screwed up the whole Shah of Iran thing and opened the way for the mullahs? Check! Consistently overrated and then failed to forecast the sudden disintegration of the Soviet Union? Check!! Never did quite figure out what Osama bin Laden was up to? Check!!!

To top it all off, along came super-top-secret agent/Vanity Fair babe Valerie Plame and her dashing, Graydon-Carter-tressed hubby, Joe Wilson, running a sting operation against the hapless Bush White House, whipsawing the president and the veep with Joe’s unprovoked New York Times tale of sipping mint tea with Colonel Kurtz up the Congo and all of sudden there’s shouting about the “sixteen words” in Chimpy’s State of the Union address and Valerie is outed by Cheney flunky Scooter Libby — okay, by Colin Powell flunky Dick Armitage, same thing — and then Judy Miller goes to jail and . . .

Zzzzzzzzzzzz.

You get the picture: In this duel of People We Like, we somehow want them both to lose. And that’s where I come in. So here’s the script that just made me a cool $1.5 mil plus five monkey points plus two first-class tickets to the premiere: Three Days of the Dodo Bird.

We open in Abu Ghraib prison, post-“Mission Accomplished,” where a SHADOWY CIA AGENT gets the bright idea to strike fear into the hearts of America’s “enemies” by photographing completely innocent prisoners in outrageous situations (piled naked on top of each other, led around on a dog leash by a woman, forced to wear panties on their heads) calculated to offend and inflame the sensibilities of the Religion of Peace. Now, you and I both know that these kinds of things happen every week at the right Hollywood parties, and they’re tons of fun, but for some weird cultural reason the photos are deemed offensive, the super-top-secret psy-war campaign winds up on the front page of the Times every day for a year, and the Shi’ites hit the fan.

We flash back to BALTIMORE, MD in 1954, where we meet the 14-year-old NANCY D’ALESANDRO, the daughter of Tommy, Jr., (Old Tommy) and Annunciata (Nancy) D’Alesandro, and sister of Tommy III (Young Tommy), both former mayors of Baltimore — yes, that Baltimore, one of the most corrupt cities in the country, where city and county officials are routinely frog-marched off to jail. Young Nancy gets a rude introduction to the unfairness of life when, as Old Tommy is about to run for governor — oh, let’s let Time magazine pick up the story:


The whirlwind next struck at Tommy’s parking garages and in a few gusts forced him to quit the gubernatorial race. A contractor named Dominic Piracci, who seemed to have a corner on the city’s garage-building business, was convicted of fraud, conspiracy and conspiracy to obstruct justice. Piracci and Tommy had long been friends, even before Piracci’s daughter, Margie, married Tommy D’Alesandro III.

Piracci had erased some names from his ledgers. Among the names deleted: Nancy D’Alesandro. On the witness stand in Piracci’s trial, Nancy admitted getting six checks totaling $11,130.78 from Piracci. But she swore that $1,500 of it was a gift to their newly wed children, Tommy III and Margie. The rest, she claimed, Piracci lent her to pay off debts incurred in her feed business and a venture with a skin softener called Velvex.
It’s not easy for Nancy to see her dad’s gubernatorial hopes go up in a puff of cement-mixer dust, nor to see her mom’s skin-softener business crash and burn. Like an Italian Scarlett O’Hara, she steps into the simple back yard of her parents’ Baltimore row house in Little Italy and shouts to the heavens: “I’ll never be poor again. I’ll never be indicted. I’ll be the best advertisement for Botox who ever lived. And I’ll rip the lungs out of anybody what says different — that means you, Steny Hoyer!”

A resentful, ambitious, and unfortunately not very bright clone of Connie Corleone, Nancy grows up, marries a guy named Pelosi from Frisco, becomes a multi-millionaireness and, miraculously, the Speaker of the House, before falling afoul of the CIA when she blows the whistle on their lies and disinformation and accuses them of lying to Congress.

Naturally, the CIA fights back and while I’m not using the tired old device of a horse’s head in her Pacific Heights bed, let’s just say that following her press conference, certain documents appear in her mailbox having to do with — I don’t know, I’m just making it up here — her family, her business dealings, and her entire way of life.

The evil CIA agent who’s on her case will remain unidentified until the very end of our movie, although throughout the picture, I’m dropping hints and red herrings. Who is the sinister figure behind the screen with the voice modulator, peddling torture disinformation to our Nancy? Who is the evil genius who commandeers Air Force One for a joyride over lower Manhattan and then retains all but one of the photos, just in case a photo of the president’s plane triumphantly flying over the ruins of the World Trade Center “accidentally” needs to get leaked before he makes his address to all 57 states of the Muslim world from Mohammed Atta’s home town of Cairo? Who is the Vulcan mind-melder who forces brave Nancy to go public with her explosive allegations, thus leading to her tragic press-conference self-immolation and cries for her resignation?

That’s right: It’s Liz Cheney. Or maybe Carrie Prejean. Or maybe even Darth Cheney himself; I haven’t decided yet. You’ll find out in a year or two.

Of course, if I really want a surprise ending, the villain will turn out to be . . . the president of the United States! Not even David Baldacci can make this stuff up.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm pretty sure Pelosi is trying to cover her ass, and is lying out of it to try and cover. I don't really care if she goes down in flames, as she's one of many Democrats who vote with Republicans on important issues than decry their own votes.

[Bender]

looks like the dems are protecting their own.

[FaithInOne]

Ron Paul wtf mate.

[FaithInOne]

I thought this was funny and did not want to start a whole new post or dig a old one up so it's here. It's a rant about Pelosi

yHdXIPaD1zo


hahahahahahahahaha

[Winehole23]

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/65027-pelosi-claim-that-cia-lied-validated-by-intel-panel

[hope4dopes]

I'm pretty sure Pelosi is trying to cover her ass, and is lying out of it to try and cover. I don't really care if she goes down in flames, as she's one of many Democrats who vote with Republicans on important issues than decry their own votes.Congrats.... Well no I'd say Pelosi"s job is to protect the intrests of rich white liberals in Marin,Sonoma,and Napa county.

[panic giraffe]

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/65027-pelosi-claim-that-cia-lied-validated-by-intel-panel

so what do we do now? just dissolve the whole agency or fire and prosecute the liars? (which would kill moral).....

[Winehole23]

No no. I just wanted to update the thread. I don't have any prescriptions here. The implications are more institutional -- how the CIA and Congress get along. I seriously doubt anyone gets punished.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Funny how "by all means necessary" is hailed only for certain groups.

No prescriptions here, either.

[Winehole23]

Funny how "by all means necessary" is hailed only for certain groups.???

[Winehole23]

As MadDog noted (http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/06/07/alleged-wikileaks-leaker-arrested/#comment-241157), Judicial Watch just got (http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2010/jun/judicial-watch-obtains-additional-top-secret-records-detailing-congressional-briefings) some new documents detailing briefings Congress received. Or rather, they got new documents providing further proof that CIA has no fucking clue (http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/03/16/cia-documents-prove-cia-claims-about-briefing-congress-on-torture-were-fabrications/) what it said to Congress during some key briefings (this batch shows, for example, that the fall 2003 briefings were never finalized into a Memo for the Record, just as earlier ones weren’t, and PDF 48 (http://www.judicialwatch.org/files/CIA%20Record%20Production%200610%20Pt%202.pdf) shows that many key briefings weren’t recorded).


But in what I’ve reviewed so far, the new documents reveal one important new detail. Page 44 of this PDF (http://www.judicialwatch.org/files/CIA%20Record%20Production%200610%20Pt%202.pdf) provides a mostly redacted record of the briefing CIA gave Porter Goss and Nancy Pelosi on Abu Zubaydah’s torture on September 4, 2002. We know–because both Goss and Pelosi have described this detail the same way (http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/21/goss-wont-elaborate-on-torture-techniques-that-were-to-be-employed/)–that CIA did not tell the House Intelligence leadership that it had already tortured Abu Zubaydah. CIA told Goss and Pelosi about waterboarding, but spoke of it as a technique that might hypothetically be used in the future, not something that had been used 83 times on one detainee the prior month.
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2010/06/07/jose-rodriguez-briefed-pelosi-and-goss-in-deceptive-abu-zubaydah-briefing/