Decepti-Libs
by Blake on Jul 9, 2009 at 11:56 Political
As everyone goes to the movies this summer and buys tickets to this summer’s biggest blockbuster on the screen, there is a struggle every bit as titanic going on in Washington between Congress, the CIA, and the Resident, as to where the power actually resides.
This is a tale of betrayal, lies, and covert actions, as well as a struggle for yet more executive power.
This would be a comedy if we could play all the sound bites of Hussein claiming that then President Bush had overstepped his authority, and executive power needed to be scaled back. There are many of those- Hussein was very critical of executive power, but then at the time he was a slacker first- term newbie Senator, playing grown- up.
Oh, how the worm has turned- it is an axiom that no one who becomes president ever wants his power to be diminished, and Hussein is NOT an exception to this rule.
Add to this tale of woe, the turncoat spy within the CIA, “Deep Nose”, or as he is known in society, Leon Panneta, the snoop in charge of covertly dismantling the spy agency, at the time where we can least afford to do so- but that has never stopped liberals before (see: Carter years, 1976- 1979).
And to complete this trifecta of incompetence, is Congress, who wants complete access to everything the CIA has, claiming that the CIA lied to Congress. The trouble with this is that Congress is an irresponsible, lying leaky body of people who have their own agendas, and probably would say anything to anybody for money- yes- that does make them whores in politics, but what else is new?
In a June 26 letter to Mr. Panetta discussing his testimony, Democrats said that the agency had “misled members” of Congress for eight years about the classified matters, which the letter did not disclose. “This is similar to other deceptions of which we are aware from other recent periods,” said the letter, made public late Wednesday by Representative Rush D. Holt, Democrat of New Jersey, one of the signers.
In an interview, Mr. Holt declined to reveal the nature of the C.I.A.’s alleged deceptions,. But he said, “We wouldn’t be doing this over a trivial matter.”
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Silvestre Reyes, Democrat of Texas, referred to Mr. Panetta’s disclosure in a letter to the committee’s ranking Republican, Representative Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, Congressional Quarterly reported on Wednesday. Mr. Reyes wrote that the committee “has been misled, has not been provided full and complete notifications, and (in at least one occasion) was affirmatively lied to.”
nytimes.com
This is typical of the ankle- biters in Congress, and could usually be ignored as the trivial annoyance it usually is, but in this resolution, the committee is seeking less executive power in revelations to the full Congress, and Hussein doesn’t want that at all.
In a related development, President Obama threatened to veto the pending Intelligence Authorization Bill if it included a provision that would allow information about covert actions to be given to the entire House and Senate Intelligence Committees, rather than the so-called Gang of Eight — the Democratic and Republican leaders of both houses of Congress and the two Intelligence Committees.
A White House statement released on Wednesday said the proposed expansion of briefings would undermine “a long tradition spanning decades of comity between the branches regarding intelligence matters.” Democrats have complained that under President George W. Bush, entire programs were hidden from most committee members for years.
nytimes.com
And then you have Leon Panetta, the stalking horse for the liberals who want to dismantle the CIA- This man is trying to have it both ways, leaking info to Congress, while working for the Resident.
In an interview yesterday, Reyes declined to expand upon the allegations in his letter, saying “it’s all classified information.” Late last night, he issued a statement crediting CIA Director Leon E. Panetta with bringing the issues to the committee’s attention at a June 24 briefing.
.washingtonpost.com
This is a complex game we have here, made more complex by Nanny Pelosi’s rambling accusation that the CIA had lied to her, when it could be verified that the CIA had in fact, told her everything she needed to know- she just, apparently, didn’t have the intelligence to keep the knowledge in her head.
Pelosi initiated the CIA feud when she accused the agency of intentionally misleading her, and not telling her about the use of waterboarding, in a September 2002 briefing on interrogations.
CIA documents released two months ago included notations indicating that Pelosi was informed at the 2002 briefing about waterboarding. Republicans have suggested Pelosi has not told the truth about her knowledge and support of the enhanced interrogation technique, an allegation they plan to repeat in today’s debate.
washingtonpost.com
Well, this is going to play out with all the angst and tension of the play “King Lear”, on the national stage, showing our enemies just how like the Keystone Kops we are in real life. What a governmental SNAFU this has become, all because eventually, thieves fall out.
And boy oh boy, are they beginning to fall out now.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: betrayal, CIA, executive power, lies, Pelosi
I would have liked to have read the above but it was just too “verbose.”
I did see this:
“…the agency had “misled members” of Congress for eight years about the classified matters…”
So Nancy was right. This is supposed to be a surprise? The CIA tells fibs?
D.
Just like you D- you even cherry pick what you read, and probably what you comprehend also.
Nancy was not shown to be right- perhaps you need to learn to read without slanting your head to the left.
See- this is your problem with the cherry- picking- recite the complete sentence and you see that it was liars (oops, democrud) who “Claimed” that the CIA had misled them.
Heck, I would have too, as they eat glue and need scissors with blunt ends. The only word they were ever able to utter in eight years was “No”, so I would say without a doubt that they have problems in cognitive development, and by failing to be honest in your quotes, so do you.
BLK: “Claimed” that the CIA had misled them.”
DAR
Observe:
“Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon E. Panetta has told lawmakers that the agency “concealed significant actions” from Congress, according to a letter released Wednesday from seven Democratic lawmakers.
The letter also contends that Mr. Panetta said CIA officials have misled Congress since 2001.” WSJ
DAR
Let’s get this straight. You are asking us to believe that these 7 Demo lawmakers went public with this letter which makes the two main claims above. “Concealed” and “mislead.” Claims which, if untrue, Panetta could and would simply swat down and make them all look like fools and liars.
If you had a little common sense you would know that they would know Panetta would read their letter too. They probably sent him a copy.
And note:
“CIA spokesman George Little said [in response], “It is not the policy or practice of the CIA to mislead Congress.” Mr. Little said the CIA itself “took the initiative to notify the oversight committees” about the lapses.” –ibid
“Lapses” in what Blake?
Think. Repeat if necessary.
D.
Dar that letter does not pertain to the same briefing that Nancy Pelosi lied about. And the fact that it is 7 Democrats tells us all we want to know. And even so–it just goes to show how safe we are in the hands of a Democratic Congress and Senate and Democratic President and Democratic CIA Director. What a circus!!!!!!!
VIC: Dar that letter does not pertain to the same briefing that Nancy Pelosi lied about.>>
DAR
That letter refers to the CIA lying to Congress, which confirms Pelosi’s claim.
Nancy’s claim with regard to her specific briefings cannot be shown to be true or false because they weren’t allowed to take notes.
VID: “What a circus!!!!”>>
DAR
Actually, the circus just left. Now we are cleaning up. There were a lot of elephants. They left a lot of poop.
D.
VIC
that letter does not pertain to the same briefing that Nancy Pelosi lied about.
SAV
This is how the right is attempting to defuse this story so that they can continue trying to make Pelosi look bad. The claim amounts to this: “The CIA is misleading Congress, but maybe not about interrogation.” The right seems to think that the latter clause is more important than the former. Sadly, the right is full of idiots and hatemongers who buy into the backward analysis.
SAV
Sadly, the right is full of idiots and hatemongers…
No hypocrisy here!
MIKE
No hypocrisy here!
SAV
See? It can be done!
MIKE
No hypocrisy here!
SAV
See? It can be done!
Huh?
MIKE
Huh?
SAV
I’m making fun of your sarcastic (and foolish) insinuation.
MIKE
Huh?
SAV
I’m making fun of your sarcastic (and foolish) insinuation.
Tell me, SAV, does it make you feel good to call me names? And don’t you see the irony of calling others haters while calling them names?
MIKE
Tell me, SAV, does it make you feel good to call me names?
SAV
The only people I called names here are the ones who buy into the backward analysis. Tell me, Mike, do you buy into the backward analysis?
MIKE
And don’t you see the irony of calling others haters while calling them names?
SAV
Only if I make the stupid assumption that namecalling occurs only inaccurately and in conjunction with hatred.
MIKE
Tell me, SAV, does it make you feel good to call me names?
SAV
The only people I called names here are the ones who buy into the backward analysis. Tell me, Mike, do you buy into the backward analysis?
MIKE
And don’t you see the irony of calling others haters while calling them names?
SAV
Only if I make the stupid assumption that namecalling occurs only inaccurately and in conjunction with hatred.
I guess I do buy into that backwards analysis as I do not believe Pelosi. She couldn’t even get her own story straight.
I also believe you can make your points without name calling. Do you really believe you can hurl insults at someone and simutanelusly convince them of your point of view? And if not, why bother to post here?
MIKE
I guess I do buy into that backwards analysis as I do not believe Pelosi.
SAV
So Pelosi says that the CIA has misled Congress, then the head of the CIA says that the CIA has misled Congress, but you don’t believe Pelosi’s claim that the CIA has misled Congress.
MIKE
I also believe you can make your points without name calling.
SAV
And I think that people shouldn’t maintain beliefs that are asinine, but I don’t always get what I want, either. Want an example? See your belief above regarding the CIA and Pelosi!
MIKE
Do you really believe you can hurl insults at someone and simutanelusly [sic] convince them of your point of view? And if not, why bother to post here?
SAV
Because the alternative is to let idiots be idiots. I find that unacceptable if it is within my power to change it. My position is: I’ll stop calling people idiots if they’ll stop behaving like idiots. It’s really that simple. Even most idiots know when they’ve had their butts kicked. They run. The only ones who aren’t smart enough to realize it are the ones who aren’t smart enough to be convinced anyway. And there are always the lurkers.
Please feel free to find anything I’ve said that is wrong and convince me that I’m wrong. As the freethinkers say, “I’ll believe anything that’s true.”
This is what you get when you install a traitor like Panetta in the CIA, because the left traditionally hates the CIA, and wants to tear it down.
Also, all the libs just can’t get Bush out of their head, and that will be their downfall- they will be so focused on Bush they will forget they are supposed to govern.
The letter does in NO way exonerate Nanny girl- she was talking about the waterboarding, in which she clearly WAS briefed- if she was so stupid as to either lie about it, or worse, not remember what she was told, that just demonstrates her incompetence. As for these other dems, monkey see, monkey do.
BLAKE
This is what you get when you install a traitor like Panetta in the CIA,
SAV
Ah, a red herring in baseless slander form. Nice.
BLAKE
The letter does in NO way exonerate Nanny girl-
SAV
Let’s review:
Pelosi says that the CIA is misleading Congress.
The CIA admits that they’ve misled Congress.
Even a first-grader can figure this one out.
It’s not a red herring if it is true, and Panetta was brought in to bring down the CIA- and like Sandy Berger, he’s probably been dressing himself in confidential documents every evening. This has to be the only reason this incompetent hack was installed where he was.
In this instance, the CIA did not have to report anything- they were batting about ideas, and you do not take every idea to a committee, especially one with as little brain power as that one- look at the libbies they had on the committee. Total waste of cranium space.
Pelosi lied- the internal memos show that- The 7 democrats thought they could provide cover for the wicked witch, instead they ripped the story open- they should have kept their mouths shut, but liberals just CAN’T do that, can they?
Now they have a CIA that is hostile to these Dems- way to go, dummies. Just what our country needs- this SO reminds me of Carter’s failed term- as in One (1) term- as in failed presidency- failed socialist policies, etc.
BLAKE
Pelosi lied- the internal memos show that-
SAV
Which memos? Provide a link.
Do your own legwork- oh that’s right, you only recognize what you agree with, under the baseless guise of being “enlightened”- what a laugh.
BLAKE
Do your own legwork-
SAV
You made the claim. It’s your legwork that needs to be done.
If you can show me “internal memos” that shows that Pelosi lied, then I’ll believe that Pelosi lied.
Yes, I made the claim, but any “proof” I brought to the table would be dismissed by the likes of you as “rightwing smears” or the like.
So why should I treat you as if you might actually listen to proof?
BLK: “can’t get Bush out of their head, and that will be their downfall…”>>
DAR
Read it and weep:
Bashing George W. Bush still politically potent.
People don’t have THAT short of a memory. You’re going to be be wearing this mill stone around your neck for quite a while. Smile, it looks good on you.
D.
What a waste of potential intelligence you are, D. People are coming around, despite your cherry- picked polls- now we’re giving money to Africa?
Hey Barry, how about our own people?
Oh that’s right- he IS African.
BLK: “now we’re giving money to Africa?”>>
DAR
Actually, you know who gave a lot of money to Africa?
GW Bush.
I think he had the goal of $15 billion but not sure he made it.
It’s one of the few things he is nearly universally given credit and praise for (and I agree 100%).
Except… by you perhaps?
That’s rather ironic isn’t it.
D.
When Bush did it, you did not want to give him credit, and he did so when we were no in the crisis we are now.
Plus, he gave to specific causes, rather than just pseudo- governments du jour in Africa.
BLK: “When Bush did it, you did not want to give him credit,”>>
DAR
Absolutely false. When Bush talked in his State of the Union address, about his plan to give $15b over several years I remember telling a rightwing friend (in an email I may still have) I intended to watch this over the years and see if it happened. I entirely give Bush credit for this, that’s why I said above “100%” above. Kudos to Bush! Good job!
D.
——————
“In his State of the Union Address in January 2003, Bush outlined a five-year strategy for global emergency AIDS relief, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Bush announced $15 billion for this effort.[246] This program is believed by some to be a positive aspect of Bush’s legacy across the political spectrum.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gw_bush
Bingo.