« previous |
MUCK HOME
| next »
The Daily Muck
Republicans are lining up to defend the CIA from Nancy Pelosi's charge that the agency lied to her about torture. We all know the CIA never lies. (AP)
Attorney General Eric Holder assured a congressional committee that the administration would not release onto U.S. soil any detainees considered dangerous. (Washington Post)
Karl Rove will be interviewed by the special DOJ prosecutor investigating the US attorney firings. (Politico)
Fearing that conservative opposition could sink the first bailout deal last fall, Ed Gillespie, then at the White House, called the president of the Heritage Foundation to sell him on the deal, then reported back with an email written in the style of a five year old. (Politico)
In the aftermath of the ouster of Ken Lewis as chairman, the Feds are pressuring Bank of America to appoint new members to the firm's board of directors, with more banking experience. (WSJ)
Ted Stevens owes between $1 million and $5 million to the high-powered Washington law firm Williams and Connolly from his recent defense. Stevens got his money's worth when the charges were dropped last month. (McClatchy)
Advertisement
Josh
Zachary
james fallows: The CIA vs. Sen. Bob Graham: how to keep score at home
May 15, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Was Pelosi briefed individually, or in a committee meeting? I would have to presume it was in committee, but I don't believe any Republicans who would have been present have stated for the record that they are sure that waterboarding was discussed specifically. They keep referring to that very suspiciously worded CIA memo and their horror that Pelosi should question the CIA's integrity, but they are NOT saying, YES, I HEARD WATERBOARDING WAS BEING USED. Of course,it's very convenient that Republicans will hide behind the ruse that they cannot talk about classified meetings...but they can sure spout off on the Speaker's audacity to call foul.
I'm no fan of Pelosi's, but I strongly suspect that those briefings were designed for just this sort purpose...to create a means to apply intense political pressure later on, should the program's purpose and legality be challenged by a future administration.
May 15, 2009 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
It again appears and correct that if, now, President Obama was truthful within his many Pledges and Promises to 'We the People'!!;
1) There would have been NO illegal and un-constitution pre-exemption from prosecution of anyone, especially CIA and that is now seemingly comming back to prove President Obama's wrongdoing and illegal ascertian and inclusive of President Obama's other wrongdoings and assertians in illegally and un-constitutionally supporting the Bush//Cheney//Rice//Powell and (Senator Obama) Administration, Practices and Principles, illegal State Secrets (and seemingly allegations of continued Torture, Illegal rendition, Illegal Wiretaps, (Murder?) ecetra and that is now more so-called factually and in truth becomming the President Obama//Bush//Cheney Administration similar and identical, Practices and Policies, (= ongoing No Access to a Court!!, No Access to the Law!! (No access to the proper and forthright, interpretation, policies and practices within Democratic Law!!) No Access to Attorneys/Lawyers!! only as the President Obama//US AG Holder Administration Allows!! and/or worse (seemingly depravtion from full and expected US Constitution, Bill of Rights Court Access and/or seemingly applications and/or seemingly possibly worse with seemingly allegations of innappropriate courts and/or seemingly so-called kangaroo courts, ecetra and with so-called and at will illegal//legal//illegal secret information withheld and/or undisclosed, ecetra).
Thank you for your time and consideration.
May 15, 2009 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is quite likely that the CIA did not lie but that Pelosi was not fully briefed and thus in effect misled.
May 15, 2009 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Torture Briefing, Sept 2002
The Great Iraq War Product Rollout Briefing, Sept 2002
Same briefing
I wonder if the briefers are still employed at CIA?
If not they can be subpoenaed to authenticate their file memos and testify
May 17, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink