Pelosi Clears Bush Of Wrongdoing
May 11, 2009 Political
Nancy Pelosi has stated on several occasions that she was informed of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT) but that she was never told that they had been used. Pelosi received her information during classified briefings and she no doubt believed that the secrecy would protect her.
Unfortunately for her, Barack Obama released classified memos of detailed legal opinions rendered by Bush administration lawyers. Those memos were extremely detailed and laid out the legal justification for the EITs including the opinion that they were within the boundaries established in the law passed by Congress.
The CIA was not particularly thrilled with the release of the memos because that act gave our enemies information about how we do business. The CIA was also not pleased with all the talk of people being prosecuted. In order to set the record straight the CIA released its own memos detailing the classified briefings. Those memos as well as the statements by others in attendance clearly show that Pelosi was briefed not only on the EITs but that they had been used. These memos contradict her denials and demonstrate that she lied.
Pelosi has now taken a new tact with regard to this issue. Continued denial is pointless so Pelosi is now asserting that the lawyers told her it was legal:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi insisted Friday that she was briefed only once about the “enhanced” interrogation techniques being used on terrorism suspects and that she was assured by lawyers with the CIA and the Department of Justice that the methods were legal. Fox News
Her statement now clears Bush administration officials of any wrong doing because they too were told by the lawyers that the EITs were legal. When Pelosi wanted to go after Bush she was content lying to the public and accusing him of wrongdoing but now she is saying that she did no wrong because the lawyers said it was OK. This means that everyone who followed the legal opinion is in the clear.
Another important issue is the lawyers themselves. They gave a well reasoned legal opinion and should not be prosecuted for interpreting the law to the best of their ability. If these folks are made scapegoats for rendering an opinion (one I happen to agree with) then this will leave the door open to prosecute all lawyers that render an opinion that turns out to be unpopular.
We have a judicial system where courts decide if laws are Constitutional. If anyone had questions about the legality of the opinion rendered then they could have taken the issue to the courts and had the courts decide. Since no one did that it is reasonable to assume that those who were briefed were comfortable with the legal opinion.
Obama opened a Pandora’s Box when he released the Bush legal memos. His decision to do so was politically motivated and his desire was to shed bad light on the Bush administration. Unfortunately for him and his party, Nancy Pelosi got caught in the crossfire.
Obama can claim the EITs were torture but the legal opinion is that they were not. Until a court decides on the issue or until Congress changes the law, they are still legal.
However, Obama did not want to take the chance that a court would confirm the legality so he released the memos which effectively killed the program.
Doing that was bad enough but if he had never mentioned prosecuting people Pelosi would not have been caught in the lie and Democrats would not look like the hypocrites we know them to be.
Rookie in the White House making rookie mistakes. Those unintended consequences will come back to bite him over and over because he does not know what he is doing.
For you people in San Francisco, Pelosi lied and played politics on this issue. She pretended to be against this and not to know of it when she knew all about it and was in favor of it.
It is time to show her the door.
Others:
Instapundit | Mudville Gazette
[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]
Pelosi Lied About Knowledge Of Interrogation Techniques
May 8, 2009 Political
Nancy Pelosi was for waterboarding before she was against it. The Speaker of the House has maintained that she only knew that the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques had been deemed legal by the Bush legal folks but that she never knew they were actually used. Pelosi has railed against the techniques and those who used them in her continued efforts to discredit the Bush administration.
The reality is, Pelosi was briefed on the techniques AND that they had been used.
In a 10-page memo outlining an almost seven-year history of classified briefings, intelligence officials said that Pelosi and then-Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.) were the first two members of Congress ever briefed on the interrogation tactics. Then the ranking member and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, respectively, Pelosi and Goss were briefed Sept. 4, 2002, one week before the first anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The memo, issued by the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency to Capitol Hill, notes the Pelosi-Goss briefing covered “EITs including the use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah.” EIT is an acronym for enhanced interrogation technique. Zubaydah was one of the earliest valuable al-Qaeda members captured and the first to have the controversial tactic known as water boarding used against him. Washington Post [emphasis mine]
The memo clearly indicates that Pelosi knew more than she admits. It would be reasonable to assume she could not reveal the classified information but her denials of any knowledge indicates she is lying about it. She could have easily stated that she cannot discuss what she hears in classified briefings but chose instead to lie.
The memos were released by intelligence officials and I believe they did so to protect people from prosecution. Pelosi and her ilk want blood but the memos are a way to say that if anyone goes down Pelosi must go with them.
This might be because Obama has ticked off the intelligence community by releasing the classified documents with the detailed legal opinion on EITs. The release clearly demonstrated that a well thought legal opinion was rendered deeming the techniques legal however, the release also told our enemies what we do and gave them information on how they can beat enhanced interrogation. This really ticked off the intelligence people.
This is what happens when a rookie in the White House tries to undermine our intelligence efforts. The intelligence community can make him look like a great man or a goat.
Pelosi is already looking bad and it will not be long before Obama is a goat as well.
Others:
Stop the ACLU
[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: CIA, memos, Obama, Pelosi, waterboarding
Barack Obama Is Misleading America
Apr 30, 2009 Political
Today marks the 100th day of the Obama Residency and he marked the occasion by holding a prime time press conference. I did not watch it but I have read about it. I did not watch because I have had enough of him and I knew what he was going to say. He basically told everyone how wonderful he is, what a great job he is doing, how much hard work is left to do, and that George Bush is to blame for any of the bad stuff.
I have written before that Obama does not really understand the Constitution and that he has stated that it has too many restrictions that he wanted (and wants?) the Supreme Court to remove. This guy is a lawyer and he was reported to be a Constitutional scholar but he knows very little about the Constitution except what Bill Ayers told him while they were passing a bong around. One thing is also clear from the speech tonight and that is; Barack Obama lies through his teeth or he does not understand the law, or both.
Specifically:
President Barack Obama said Wednesday night that waterboarding authorized by former President George W. Bush was torture, and the information gained from terror suspects through its use could have been obtained by other means. “In some cases it may be harder,” he conceded at a White House news conference marking a whirlwind first 100 days in office. Breitbart
I want you liberals to read this carefully and I want you to try to understand. Waterboarding is not torture under the definition of torture established by the Congress, an august body to which Barack Obama once belonged. It does not matter how you FEEL about waterboarding and it does not matter if you THINK it is torture, the fact is that Congress has decided that it is not.
The memos that Obama released are very lengthy and contain a great deal of legal opinion on the issue and they reference Congresses’ definition of torture and use it to come to their conclusions. Waterboarding is not torture which might explain why Nancy Pelosi voiced no objection to it when she was briefed on it at the time. Yes boys and girls, despite her objections and denials, Nancy Pelosi was at the meetings and she was told about waterboarding and the plans to use it. She told the CIA to do more (more work to get information).
The Bush administration allowed these enhanced interrogation techniques to take place because they were in accordance with the law. It does not matter that Obama says waterboarding is torture. What matters is the law and what real lawyers who actually practiced it had to say about it. I imagine if Obama insists on prosecuting the legal folks who rendered the opinions they might end up at the Supreme Court. It would be interesting to see what they have to say about the law Congress wrote.
In any event, Obama is continuing to blame Bush for things that are in the past. He was merely applying blame and mentioning torture to justify his stupid release of classified memos, and act that many have criticized. The release will have a chilling effect on how our intelligence gathering efforts move forward and function. Obama had to make it look like he did the right thing so he called waterboarding torture so he could claim to have brought it all to light.
He is, after all, all about transparency. He had to release those memos and it was all about transparency. Let me clear that up as well. Obama released those memos for political gain. He has not released any of the memos that show how successful enhanced interrogation was because it would not allow him to score points by claiming to be the one who stopped torture. If Obama were so interested in transparency he would release his original birth certificate. The REAL one that is hand or type written with ink signatures from a doctor. The REAL one that contains all the pertinent information. If he really believed in transparency he would do that.
He is not in favor of transparency. He only wants you to see what he decides you should see. It seems to me that if you claim to be transparent then it means you are transparent in everything.
Interestingly, the release of the memos might hurt him in the future. If he prosecutes those who rendered the opinions then those lawyers in his administration who will be asked to render opinions might be a bit gun shy if they think the next administration can come after them for doing their jobs. They might not give good opinions or ones that he wants because of fear, a fear he will have created through his stupidity.
Obama is still on this kick that he can blame everything on Bush and get away with it. That will work for a while with the moonbats who follow him but it is already wearing thin to those of us who believe he is full of excuses and an apologist for American greatness.
Barack Obama is only interested in remaking America. He wants to make it into a Socialist nation where government is huge and takes care of everyone by taking from those who produce and giving it to those who mooch off them. He does not understand the Constitution or he ignores it (either is bad) and he puts politics above what is good for this country.
He is a political hack and he is amounting to one huge failure.
[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: CIA, law, memos, Obama, relased, speech, terror, traiter
A Memo On Crisis
Apr 29, 2009 Political
I read several papers a day, almost all of which are unfortunately liberal in tone, if not content, and I read the Op- Ed columns, many of which are also liberal.
One of these, written by Thomas Friedman, had a screed today on just how good it was that Barama had released (selectively), the memos on enhanced interrogations, saying that he (Barama) had got it just about right when he released the memos, but said he would not prosecute the lawyers who worked to implement the policy.
The president decided to selectively expose the memos to placate those foam at the mouth liberals who were screaming for blood- but he refused to prosecute these people, because he knows that this could happen to him.
The problem becomes a Pontius Pilate One, whereby he can say he (Barama) did nothing to prosecute, but his slavish minions like Pelosi, Conyers, Reid, Soros, and all the other moronic imbeciles who elected this man will gleefully tear at this “wound” in America, all with Barama’s tacit approval, and the cheering of the liberal press.
Thomas Friedman, in his article, does several liberal tricks of the press (probably how he won his pulitzers- or no one else was in competition), in that he keeps referring to Al- Qaida and bin Laden in the past tense, as if the threat is gone. Not once, or twice, but constantly throughout the article does he refer to these terrorists in the past tense.
But then, he writes this- note the use, once again, of past tense- “..Osama bin Laden and Al- Qaida aspired to deliver a devastating blow to America, They ” were involved in an extraordinarily sophisticated and professional effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction, In this case, nuclear material,” Michael Scheuer the former CIA bin Laden expert told 60 minutes in 2004.”
Does anybody think that Al-Qaida has ceased their search for fissile material to do us harm? Thomas Friedman certainly seem to think so, judging from the way he writes. Personally, I believe that even if bin Laden was dead, the search for WMDs would go on, despite Mr. Friedman’s seeming surety that Al-Qaida no longer seems to look for bomb material.
Now, he does say that post 9/11 remains a perilous time, but the one paragraph that really caught my eye in the midst of this diatribe was this: ” We have the luxury of having this torture debate now, because there was no second 9/11, and it was not for want of trying. Had there been, a vast majority of Americans would have told the government( and still will ), ” Do whatever it takes.” ”
I notice that he gives former President Bush no credit, nor does he credit this program of enhanced interrogation with obtaining information, which is disingenuous to say the least, and a flat out lie by omission in fact. All the facts need to be laid out in front of the American people in its entirety, not just selective memos , but as Dick Cheney said, let the American people judge on all the facts. Selective release just confuses the problem and just shows what Barama wants you to see. He doesn’t want you to peek behind the curtain and see the naked process of liberalism. Barama counts on crisis.
Come on Barry, show it all- are you afraid of the truth? I think you are.
[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]