Pelosi says CIA misled her on waterboarding

Friday 15th May, 07:20 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 174 Total Comments Show All

Noliving at 07:17 AM JST - 18th May

Ok, my mistake..its quite obvious that when I was talking about when I said enhanced techniques in those posts that I was talking about waterboarding exclusively. The memo that abc news showed that they, cia and pelosi did talk about the EIT's being used on abu zubaydah, they don't say waterboarding but they do say a description of the EIT's currently being employed were also talked about. The question then becomes is what other EIT techniques were currently being employed on abu zubaydah. It's ambiguous. Never mind I was mistaken, it was pelosi who claimed that all forms of EIT's being used at that time were never discussed at her intelligence briefing, just that she was told they were legal. The CIA document though shows that EIT's currently being used at that time were indeed discussed at that meeting. Well since she has been caught lying right there claiming they were only discussing the possibility of EIT's being used not about the discussion of any of the EIT's currently used at that time, which they did indeed discuss, I would say it's also a legit possibility that she is lying about waterboarding.

No I'm not wrong again it's just a point of view, they were not allowed to take notes at the meeting, Graham recorded the main points after the meeting but didn't go into detail each of the main points, just a list of them. If I had an hour lecture with you and you were not allowed to take notes, I doubt that immediately after the lecture you would be able to tell me the main point at minute 5 in great detail, you could probably tell me the title of the topic but not the detail. Ya he does have those notebooks but like I said he can't remember what was said word for word, even his notes that he wrote right away can't tell you what was said word for word, they are just a list of topics discussed. Just like the CIA documents his are ambiguous.
yabits at 08:15 AM JST - 18th May

No I'm not wrong again it's just a point of view, they were not allowed to take notes at the meeting, Graham recorded the main points after the meeting but didn't go into detail each of the main points, just a list of them. If I had an hour lecture with you and you were not allowed to take notes, I doubt that immediately after the lecture you would be able to tell me the main point at minute 5 in great detail, you could probably tell me the title of the topic but not the detail.

If we had a one hour meeting and you brought up the fact that waterboarding was actually being used on detainees, I can guarantee you that, no matter what else was discussed, the vast majority of people would have remembered it and noted it down later -- whether it occurred during Minute-5 or any other time. That would be an extremely monumental piece of information.

I would say that Graham's description of the meeting fits the pattern that Pelosi described. I do not believe either is lying.
Noliving at 09:33 AM JST - 18th May

It is a possibility that you would remember it. Ya it's similar but there are significant differences. I don't believe graham is lying about his meeting but I do believe that pelosi is lying about her meeting.
Molenir at 07:28 PM JST - 18th May

Its pretty obvious that Pelosi is merely trying to cover her butt. Its pretty much standard policy for a politician when being caught lying on a politically sensitive topic. Worth all the discussion, probably not, though its amusing to see how hypocritical the Dems are again, that in itself is nothing new. From what I can see, this is pretty much a Dem feeding frenzy. Those in the Dem party who don't like Pelosi want to tear her down and put in a new speaker. Reps would love this as well, as they figure anything bad for Dems is good for them. Honestly though, I seriously doubt it will impact either her or her position. Even if it was a blatant lie, its doubtful it would be enough to bring her down.
teleprompter at 07:32 PM JST - 18th May

Even if it was a blatant lie, its doubtful it would be enough to bring her down.

The Democrat Party's identity politics is too important a crusade for the mainstream media to let Pelosi be brought down.

I predict she will survive, at least til 2010.
SezWho2 at 07:34 PM JST - 18th May

teleprompter,

I asked

And the lie was...?

and you said

"Bush just wanted all a da oil in Iraq!"

That was a lie. But it was not Pelosi's lie. Bush, by the way, wanted something equally improbable from Iraq.
yabits at 07:47 PM JST - 18th May

Its pretty much standard policy for a politician when being caught lying on a politically sensitive topic.

Get the truth commission in place and let's find out who is lying. If it's Pelosi, I've got no problem whatsoever with the Democrats getting her to step aside.
EurajReturns at 12:17 AM JST - 19th May

I wonder how many pairs of shoes she's swallowed with how many times she's put her foot in her mouth.
Molenir at 02:25 AM JST - 19th May

I'd really rather avoid a "truth" commission. I have to agree with the Republicans on this. Pelosi is claiming the CIA lied. So provide evidence, or just apologize and move on. So she knew way back when. Who cares! Her positions will have been a bit hypocritical, but she is a hypocrite, everyone knows it. Of course Dems knew what was going on. It wasn't until it became politically viable and helpful that they came out strongly against it. Thinking otherwise is simply naive at best.
SezWho2 at 08:26 AM JST - 19th May

To think that torture does not happen is naive. It even happens within the confines of the NYC police department and it even victimizes those who have the unquestionable protection of American law.

The question here is not whether the Dems knew what was going on. It is, specifically, whether the CIA did or did not mislead her at a particular time, on a particular date and at a particular place.
Bologna at 10:34 AM JST - 19th May

Yes. I this article.
Bologna at 10:40 AM JST - 19th May

Yes, I agree.
Wolfpack at 10:29 AM JST - 20th May

Pelosi knew and agreed with the enhanced interroation techniques until it suited her not to. She has simply been stupid enough to be caught in a lie. She is hyper-partisan and she let her hatred of Bush get the better of her. Bring on the Truth Commission - first up, the Speaker of the House!
teleprompter at 11:06 AM JST - 20th May

Rasmussen:

"The CIA is viewed favorably by 63% and unfavorably by 24%. For Pelosi, the comparable numbers are 35% favorable and 55% unfavorable."

Cheney wins, Obama loses.
yabits at 02:43 AM JST - 22nd May

"The CIA is viewed favorably by 63% and unfavorably by 24%. For Pelosi, the comparable numbers are 35% favorable and 55% unfavorable." Cheney wins, Obama loses.

How does Rasmussen poll Cheney's unfavorable rating vs. Obama's? (Hint: Cheney's approval ratings are lower than Pelosi's.)

Obama wins, Cheney loses.