I am rather amazed by this claim by the Speaker of the House.
It has been very hard for me to get over my anger with the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate over the last several years. Mostly, I have gotten over it, but things like this get me angry with them again.
To be clear what I was always angry about: I thought pretty much everything that happened during those year was either justifiable or at least understandable. I actually support things like waterboarding and I do not believe that under the proper controlled circumstances it constitutes torture. I do not. In fact, I think much of what gets called “torture” these days (like scaring someone with a bug or making them listen to music they don’t like) constitutes a rather dangerous degradation of the word “torture.” Hey, if making someone hot and uncomfortable constitutes torture, and most people find that acceptable (and I daresay most do), then why not just start putting cigarettes out in people’s eyes? Torture is torture, right? If it’s OK to make someone lose a little sleep, it’s okay to rip their fingernails off and break their legs and intentionally set them wrong so they’re crippled for life, right? It’s all the same, it’s all the same, so why not go for broke if you’re going to do anything at all to make someone uncomfortable or scared?
I also absolutely and unequivocally supported going into Iraq. We were right to go there, and we’re right to be there now. I have never changed my mind on that–never.
What always disgusted me was the complete political cowardice on display by the Democratic leadership during those days. They apparently had no convictions. They either supported it all because they thought it was a good idea and then lacked the courage to stand by those convictions, or, they were full of it all along and only found their so-called “courage” when it was convenient to do so. I believe they deserved the thorough spankings they got in 2002 and 2004 because of their behavior.
Well now the Speaker basically says she got lied to. OK, I’m sorry, I can’t think of anything nice to say here, but I suspect this ploy will not serve her or her party well, and unless some amazing information shows up I think she really ought to consider resigning at this point. Newt Gingrich resigned for far less dishonorable behavior.
I will not enjoy watching this spectacle. I feel dirty just seeing it, and remembering it all.
This is worse than when Jay Rockefeller, ranking member of the Senate Foreign Intelligence committee, claimed he didn’t have appropriate legal advice when informed what was going on a few years ago. Whoof.
{ 29 comments }
This is a preemptive political hatchet job that the CIA and others involved in torture are attempting to try to stop any serious investigation of what actually went on. They hope to convince Pelosi that investigating torture might get her in trouble too.
The truth is we do not know what Pelosi was told in those briefings in 2002. The CIA has no records of what she was told. When the CIA briefs members of congress about highly classified CIA operations, they are not going to leave it to chance what the members of congress are told. The CIA would prepare a written memo outlining exactly what the content of the briefing would be so that this would not be left to the whims of the briefer. This memo would have to be approved at high management levels of the CIA. The fact that the CIA cannot find any such memo is very telling. The CIA is relying on the memory of individuals as to what they briefed members of congress. The members of congress would not have been allowed to take notes in these highly classified briefings, but the CIA should still have the briefing memos. The fact that they do not, is highly suspicious. It looks like the CIA destroyed these memos so that they could claim to have briefed more fully than what they really did.
If the CIA cannot find the briefing memos, this is an attempted cover up.
With the seriousness of the topic aside, I am actually enjoying watching the Democrat powers that be (and their devoted followers) go on the defensive for a change.
I am surprised and a bit disappointed by their fumbling amateurishness so far. But it’s been eight years since they’ve had to accept responsibility for their actions, so it’s understandable they’re a bit rusty.
Now I want to see how quickly they learn to adapt. IMO, they’ve only got a few months before it’s too late, or 2010 will be like 1994 all over again.
Mikeca,
That is total and unsupportable BS.
Pelosi is responding to the Karl Rove and Dick Cheney sound bytes the past three days on big media.
I listened today on KGO San Francisco radio morning talk guy, Ronn Owens, interviewing E J Dionne of the WashPost for an hour.
The good news is the CIA is not after Speaker Pelosi.
The bad news is — Speaker Pelosi is trying to dance around the issues and doing quite well.
I disagree. I think she’s doing really badly.
“I wasn’t told… well, OK, I was told, but not TOLD told. They didn’t TELL me as such, they just said the information out loud in a room I happened to be in at the time.” She sounds ridiculous.
Bush’s presidency started to go south in a very big way when he and the CIA went crosswise.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the CIA has a faction that decides to target the Speaker of the House.
This could get very interesting.
Elizabeth,
I meant only that Pelosi was doing quite well dancing around the issue, not that she was doing at all well with the issue.
Mc Kieran:
“That is total and unsupportable BS. ”
You really think some high level CIA official goes over to congress and wings these briefings off the top of his head?
The CIA would have carefully planned exactly what congress was told, to make sure that all operations were properly briefed to congress as required by law. There would at least be a written outline, if not an exact written memo that would simply be read to congress people. If these documents still exist the CIA must have them and can clearly answer the question of exactly what Pelosi was told.
Even if Pelosi was told the CIA was waterboarding people, what could she have done about it. It would be classified, so she could not discuss it in public or with other members of congress. She could have written a letter the the CIA or white house registering her opposition to what was being done. Jane Harman apparently did this sometime later when she was briefed.
Republicans have suggested that Pelosi could have voted against CIA funding bills in congress. Even if Pelosi believed that the CIA was using illegal and immoral interrogation techniques, to vote to defund the CIA in the middle of two wars would be the height of recklessness. You don’t defund the whole police department because of one or two bad police officers, and you don’t defund the CIA in the middle of two wars because of some bad behavior by the CIA.
This is all a side show to distract your attention from the real torture story. There is more and more evidence coming out that the waterboarding was not just done to gain intelligence about terrorists operations that might threaten the US. Another main motivation was to get intelligence connecting al Qaeda to Iraq to provide justification for the Iraq invasion. That is the reason that a couple of high value prisoners we had were waterboarded hundreds of times. They would not confess to links between al Qaeda and Iraq.
The Pelosi story is a distraction to try to cover up the real story.
mikeca – It is amazing how quickly the Left leaps to conspiracy theories every time something doesn’t fit their preferred narrative. I’ve always found this tendency on the Left to be fascinating.
Especially when I consider that this sort of reasoning, along with the “blame America first” mentality pretty much puts the Left in the position of defending the innocence of America’s sworn enemies, while accusing America’s conservatives of being guilty of everything from torture to treason as a matter of course.
It really has become true that on the Left there is only one evil force left in the Universe, and that evil force is the Republican party.
It’s sad, actually, to see how deranged the Left has become.
CosmicConservative: It is amazing how quickly the Left leaps to conspiracy theories every time something doesn’t fit their preferred narrative
Of course it was conservatives who leaped to believe in the conspiracy theories of Laurie Mylroie, which led us into a unnecessary war in Iraq.
Uh, ‘scuse me, but if the CIA knew they were trying to support a lie (e.g. al Qaeda links to Iraq, which you suggest they knew did not exist), why would they waterboard detainees to get confessions?
This is all a recap of the same old story of the Evil Genius Bush administration that took us to war to take over Iraq on the basis of WMDs that he knew weren’t there, and then forgot to bother planting them.
Or that Bush deviously knocked down the Twin Towers to provide a pretext for war with Iraq, and then somehow forgot to manufacture evidence of Iraq’s involvement.
If you say we’re capable of these kinds of acts of supreme deception in the service of monstrous nation-changing aims on the part of a few corrupt individuals in high places, then to suggest that the machinery of our government is dependent upon things like “getting a confession” seems very foolish. If the CIA were being called upon—and agreed—to provide “evidence” that could be used to justify an otherwise unsupportable invaasion, then they would have just freaking lied and nobody in what amounts to a puppet government would be in any position to gainsay it or bring any of it to public attention.
Brian Tiemann asks:
This McClatchy article from a few weeks ago quotes a “A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the interrogation issue” like this. Note the quote marks in the original story around the a number of paragraphs indicating they are exact quotes from the intelligence official.
The answer seems to be because the top aids to Cheney and Rumsfeld demanded that they use harsher and harsher techniques to get information connecting al Qaeda to Iraq.
This segment from Rachel Maddow show outlines a lot of the information we know about the use of torture.
It includes an interview with Charles Duelfer, who was in charge of interrogation of a former Iraq intelligence officer. He says he received a suggestion from Washington that he use torture, including waterboarding, to get information from this intelligence officer about WMDs and links between Iraq and al Qaeda. This was after the invasion. This had nothing to do with protecting America or our troops. This had to do with coming up with an after the fact justifications to support the Iraq invasion, a purely political objective.
Meanwhile the media is running around doing there best Captain Renault impersonations that the CIA might have mislead Pelosi.
“This is a preemptive political hatchet job that the CIA and others involved in torture are attempting to try to stop any serious investigation of what actually went on.”
ROFLMAO!
Man, it must be nice to be so encased in a comfortable bubble of left-wing ideology and automatic partianship. I remember what that was like, back when I was in my 20s.
The Speaker of the House, and any ranking member of the House leadership, is perfectly capable of demanding answers, in a much detail as she wants, and is perfectly capable of using non-public channels to ask said questions and express concerns and lodge protests with the heads of the appropriate agencies and with the White House. Just as the briefings are classified, so too can any followup inquiries and complaints.
This is a repeat of Jay Rockefeller, serving decades as a Senator and sitting for years as ranking member of the Senate Select Intelligence Commttee, pretending he knew nothing and understood nothing when he was fully briefed on what wa going on.
The Speaker should do the right thing and resign. Instead, it appears that she and her followers wish to invoke conspiracy theories about the evil CIA career servants. You know, people like, oh, who was that CIA desk jockey who was a Democratic hero and celebrity when she was supposedly “outed as a secret agent?” Plame, right? Now all her coworkers are accused of lying and engaging in a conspiracy to discredit the Speaker of the House. So apparently they’re only heroes at Langley if they’re attacking George Bush. Otherwise they’re lying torturing scumbags.
Whatever. The Speaker should either explain herself fully or do the right thing and resign. Newt Gingrich resigned for far, far less than this. She should salvage whatever honor she’s got left and do the same.
That’s a point that should be made more often, more forcefully.
If we redefine torture to mean less horrible things, then we’re more likely to – contrary to the desires of the redefiners – end up making people think that real torture is less bad, rather than that the psychological manipulation and intense discomfort involved here are as bad as pulling fingernails or using jumper cables on genitals.
Mike: How is “get information about WMD”s post-invasion CYA? Everyone including the Democrats and foreign intelligence thought that Iraq had WMD programs and probably hidden WMDs. Anti-war groups used the threat of their use as a reason to not invade. That interrogators were asked to look for information on WMDs and possible links to Al Quaeda suggests not “post-facto justfication” but “doing their job”.
Then again, a lot of people seem to believe that “no direct operational links” (what the all the investigators have found) is the same as “no links”, which is what was commonly reported.
But, hey. What’s a little convenient ignoring of important words, when there’s politics to be done?
Waterboarding and similar torture techniques are effective at making people sign false confessions that can be used for propaganda or in show trials. They are ineffective at getting actionable, reliable intelligence. We do train some US service personnel to try to resist these torture techniques, but that does not mean that they are not torture or that they are in anyway effective at getting reliable intelligence.
So exactly what were we after in waterboarding KSM 183 times in one month? Were we trying to get propaganda confessions or actionable intelligence? If we were only trying to get actionable intelligence, why did we use techniques that are known to be almost useless for that?
Well, if waterboarding is only good for propoganda confessions for show trials why haven’t we, you know, had any?
Perhaps because it’s not quite so useless at extracting actionable intelligence as you believe?
Adult life in the commons is riddled with examples of mental illness and narcissistic personality disorders, yet, when members of Congress demonstrate these significant mental instabilities we miss the signals. And yes, gender matters; it matters in terms of vanity, style and capacity for deception.
Pelosi is finally coming undone. This pernicious princess of a most questionable Baltimore pedigree stands today as an entirely manufactured human presence — a face stretched across the tip of a tentacle of transgenerational syndicalist thuggery spinning the wheels of insider dealings.
Pelosi, Murtha, Madoff, Paulson, Geitner, Sebelius… these people aren’t elite though they certainly live like it. The pretensions of their manufactured identities are the evidence of their narcissistic disorders. There is not a Picasso, Lennon, Mozart, Browning, Jefferson, Aristotle, Honda or Tesla to be found among them. There is a aristocracy in humanity, but it seldom includes the politicians, educators, lawyers and bureaucrats who instead disproportionately populate and operate the historical practice of Democide.
Pelosi got cornered and turned pissy. Pelosi is no different from Obama. They are the same. The SAME!!
That’s the Obama you’ll soon be meeting. That’s who these people are.
They ran your Middle Schools and High Schools. Remember?
willem,
That’s priceless. I’m putting it in my time capsule.
Yu-Ain Gonnano:
They tried to have what were almost show trials in kangaroo courts, but the Supreme court rejected the proposal to use military tribunals under very restrictive guidelines.
willem:
Well Willem, that has to rank as one of the most incoherent comments I have ever read on a blog.
So you don’t like Nancy Pelosi and Obama because they picked on you in high school?
Mikeca:
“Waterboarding and similar torture techniques are effective at making people sign false confessions that can be used for propaganda or in show trials. They are ineffective at getting actionable, reliable intelligence.”
When you make two preposteriously false statements, the first one being hate-filled slander and the second being provably, objectively false, you make it pretty obvious to everyone who’s paying attention that you’re saying something hatemongering and inflammatory in a pathetic attempt to change the subject.
Fact is, my blinkered partisan friend, that the Speaker has been nailed to the wall. She knew about the waterboarding, she voiced no objection to the waterboarding, she even gave it her tacit approval. It’s all over now, you can stop tap-dancing. She is attempting to slander the entire CIA organization now, and you’re apparently happy to go along with it until someone points out how preposterous this is.
Get over it. Democratic party leaders knew all about these uses of “torture” to gather intelligence–and that it was working. They knew, they did not object, they even approved. Please let us know when you’ve let this reality sink in and are ready to discuss it like an adult, rather than try to change the subject again. Thanks.
This is quite a claim. On what basis do you know this to be true? Were you in the room? Did you hear the briefing? Or are you just making this up?
The facts are:
1) The CIA says it briefed Pelosi on detainee interrogations in early Sept 2002 as a Democratic member of the House Intelligence Commitee. The CIA said the briefing indicated that waterboarding was being used.
2) Nancy Pelosi says the briefing never indicated that waterboarding was being used.
3) Bob Graham, who was a Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence committee was brief by the CIA in late Sept 2002 on detainee interrogations. Bob Graham also says the briefing did not mention waterboarding other techniques that could be torture. Bob Graham has consulted his notes and talked to an aide that was present at the briefing, and they all agree there was no mention of waterboarding or torture in that briefing.
Bob Graham keeps detailed notes of everything. He is not making this up or winging it. When Bob Graham asked the CIA for dates on which he was briefed in 2002, the CIA told him he was briefed 4 times and gave him specific dates. Bob Graham consulted his diaries and notes and found he was only briefed on one of those dates, in late Sept 2002. He questioned the CIA about the other briefings, and after a few days the CIA admitted the other briefings had never taken place, but the CIA could not explain why it had initially given him the 4 dates.
Maybe the CIA decided in Sept 2002 to brief Democrats on the House Intelligence committee about watterboarding, but not the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence committee, but this looks more and more like the CIA’s records about these briefings may not be completely accurate.
Oh, so now a member of the Senate’s personal notes have direct bearing on briefings for the Speaker of the House. And the Speaker can basically accuse the entire CIA of a conspiracy and a coverup and you’ll go along with that too.
Maybe changing the subject and sticking to conspiracy theories is the best way to go, but I doubt it.
Nancy Pelosi was briefed in 2002 as a member of the House Intelligence committee. She did not become Speaker of the House until 2006. She became the the Democratic minority leader in 2003.
The question I posed is valid. Why would the CIA brief House Intelligence Committee members about waterboarding and not Senate Intelligence Committee members.
The spread sheet that the CIA released describing these briefings says exactly the same thing for the Bob Graham briefing. If this spread sheet is wrong about the Bob Graham briefing, it can just as well be wrong about the Pelosi breifing.
We all know she wasn’t Speaker at the time. The point is that the Senate committee is briefed separately, and regardless, what you just pointed to clearly indicates that this was all on the table and discussed.
So now if they can’t prove that a Senator’s recollection is wrong, that must indicate something significant about a completely separate meeting with the House?
Oh, whatever Mike. Just tell us more about how there’s a CIA conspiracy/coverup here, and how we use show trials when we don’t and how EITs don’t provide intelligence that saves lives even though factually speaking we already know it did.
Never mind. Clearly, the CIA is still in league with the fascist Bush administration. Let’s just rest on that.
Mikeca:
When the full story comes out on this, be assured that I’ll gladly remind you of all the trash-talking, conspiracy theory, partisan tripe you’ve spewed here.
Dean:
The Senate committee was briefed separately and a few weeks later, but the CIA spread sheet has exactly the same description, word for word, for both briefing, and that one sentence description is the whole basis for the claim that Pelosi was briefed on waterboarding and torture in Sept 2002.
The CIA has more records of what the content of these briefings were suppose to be. According to something I read, Pelosi sent and aid to the CIA to read those classified descriptions before she gave her press conference, so she knows what they say.
And by the way, even if Pelosi was briefed in 2002 on use of waterboarding, it still does not change the facts. George Bush, Dick Chenney, John Yoo and others were responsible for this policy. Waterboarding has always been considered torture. The legal arguements that were made to support this were vacuous. Torture is illegal and is a violation of basic American values.
“Waterboarding has always been considered torture. The legal arguements that were made to support this were vacuous. Torture is illegal and is a violation of basic American values.”
And thus Mikeca demonstrates with brilliant and vise-like logic that William Jefferson Clinton is an evil war criminal for allowing his own special forces units to be tortured BY THEIR OWN SUPERIORS.
I expect the clamoring for William Jefferson Clinton’s head on a pike to begin forthwith. I mean if waterboarding TERRORISTS is a war crime imagine how much worse of a crime it is to waterboard YOUR OWN MEN.
Training US service personnel to resist torture is not the same as torturing prisoners.
Punching someone in the face in a bar is assault. Punching someone in the face in a boxing mach is not.
Grow up. Stop making childish arguments.
Comments on this entry are closed.