I was wrong on Pelosi. I side with Leon Panetta.

[DiveCon]

we mock you bobo.. you seem to be in yer manic phase!

yup
LOL

 

[sealybobo]

bobo the moron also believes Bush caused 9/11
so not much credibility for you


also as i explained to you before, Bush was NEVER in action so he could not ever be MIA

Caused or allowed it to happen?

I also love how you guys give Bush the moron a pass for getting hit on 9-11.

Fuck believing if he "caused it". Your such a partisan bitch you give him a pass for being hit on 9-11.

And BOY OH BOY will you bash Obama if the same thing happens on his watch.

Remember, Obama gets a pass on the first terrorist attack, just like you gave Bush.

And we can say, "hey, he hasn't been hit again". Like you cock suckers did.

Just like Kerry couldn't flip flop but you voted for the KING of flip flops McCain.

Hypocrite.

uh, no, its you thats the hypocrite
Obama has flopped more than kerry
LOL

Why do you care? He has flopped on the liberals and turned out to be more of a centrist.

You should love that, but you don't care how good he does, just like you didn't care how great Clinton was.

All you care about is GOP because you are a brainwashed little bitch.

Everything that Obama does bad, watch, are things that the GOP do on purpose.

Cave into the healthcare and credit card companies and bankers and oil men?

Not get us out of Iraq?

Jobs still going overseas?

Its kind of hard to hear you complain about these things when last year you were defending the status quo.

I think you are just a partisan bitch playing politics. You don't care about these issues or America.

 

[DiveCon]

Obama is doing all the same stupid things bitches like YOU whined about Bush


LOL
hypocrite


bush does it, BAD,EVIL

Obama does it Whooo Hoo

 

[sealybobo]

Obama is doing all the same stupid things bitches like YOU whined about Bush


LOL
hypocrite


bush does it, BAD,EVIL

Obama does it Whooo Hoo

We don't cheer when Obama does those things. We complain. Where have you been stupid? He's caving into the healthcare and sending jobs overseas. Show me where we defend this like you defend the GOP for outsouring all our jobs? Remember, you defended it because you like the corporate profits and cheap goods. You don't hear us defending illegal workers like you guys did. Quit re writing history fool.

This is why it is better when Dems lead. Sure all politicians may be the same, but the voters are not. GOP voters are stupid fucks. When Bush sends jobs overseas, you cheer.

But at least now you are with us on stopping Obama from letting more jobs go. So this is good. Now that it is a Democrat in charge, you are finally willing to admit jobs going overseas is not a good thing and healthcare does need to be reformed. You wouldn't admit it when Bush was in charge. I wonder why. HACK!!!

So I'm glad you are with us now douch bag. Now start calling and complain about jobs going overseas and insist on single payer!!!!

 

[DiveCon]

Obama is doing all the same stupid things bitches like YOU whined about Bush


LOL
hypocrite


bush does it, BAD,EVIL

Obama does it Whooo Hoo

We don't cheer when Obama does those things. We complain. Where have you been stupid? He's caving into the healthcare and sending jobs overseas. Show me where we defend this like you defend the GOP for outsouring all our jobs? Remember, you defended it because you like the corporate profits and cheap goods. You don't hear us defending illegal workers like you guys did. Quit re writing history fool.

This is why it is better when Dems lead. Sure all politicians may be the same, but the voters are not. GOP voters are stupid fucks. When Bush sends jobs overseas, you cheer.

But at least now you are with us on stopping Obama from letting more jobs go. So this is good. Now that it is a Democrat in charge, you are finally willing to admit jobs going overseas is not a good thing and healthcare does need to be reformed. You wouldn't admit it when Bush was in charge. I wonder why. HACK!!!

So I'm glad you are with us now douch bag. Now start calling and complain about jobs going overseas and insist on single payer!!!!

you are such a fucking moron
no one cheered when jobs went overseas
and bush had nothing to do with it
thats why you are nothing but a partisan hack
jobs are STILL going overseas, but you dont see me blaming Obama for it, do ya, asshole?
NO

 

[sealybobo]

Obama is doing all the same stupid things bitches like YOU whined about Bush


LOL
hypocrite


bush does it, BAD,EVIL

Obama does it Whooo Hoo

We don't cheer when Obama does those things. We complain. Where have you been stupid? He's caving into the healthcare and sending jobs overseas. Show me where we defend this like you defend the GOP for outsouring all our jobs? Remember, you defended it because you like the corporate profits and cheap goods. You don't hear us defending illegal workers like you guys did. Quit re writing history fool.

This is why it is better when Dems lead. Sure all politicians may be the same, but the voters are not. GOP voters are stupid fucks. When Bush sends jobs overseas, you cheer.

But at least now you are with us on stopping Obama from letting more jobs go. So this is good. Now that it is a Democrat in charge, you are finally willing to admit jobs going overseas is not a good thing and healthcare does need to be reformed. You wouldn't admit it when Bush was in charge. I wonder why. HACK!!!

So I'm glad you are with us now douch bag. Now start calling and complain about jobs going overseas and insist on single payer!!!!

you are such a fucking moron
no one cheered when jobs went overseas
and bush had nothing to do with it
thats why you are nothing but a partisan hack
jobs are STILL going overseas, but you dont see me blaming Obama for it, do ya, asshole?
NO

I am complaining! I did write/call Obama and my two senators.

Did you ever complain to bush? No you did not.

You are a worthless American.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I made a mistake.

What made you come to this conclusion?

Leon Panetta. I thought I made that clear. My mistake.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I made a mistake.

And that's different how?

this time he is at least admitting it

cute

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If we're counting on the veracity of the CIA to discredit Pelosi, we're counting on an agency with a fifty year history of misleading both Congress and every POTUS they ever worked for.

I have no idea what they told Pelosi, nor do I much care, either. The DEms rolled over and let Bush II's admin do anything it damned well pleased, so their protestations that they didn't know or were mislead simply do not much impress me. They were cowardly and failed to do their jobs in Congress.

But I know damned well that the record of the CIA isn't good when it comes to truth telling.

And if any of you read the history of the CIA, you'll know that too.

Both Republican POTUS and Democratic POTUS distrusted that organization precisely because it lies like a rug.

Nobody has ever considered Leon Panetta to be a man of mixed messages and words.

 

[garyd]

God the insanity never ends. Ever watch MSNBC? Your so-called spineless media has been on Bush's ass ever chance it could get since day one. Why do you think they did about forty million Florida recounts and then posted the results (Bush won) so far behind the Obits that almost no one read it?

Why do you thing the Alphabet soup gang, printed 10 negatives on McCain for every negative it did on Obama.

 

[Ravi]

God the insanity never ends. Ever watch MSNBC? Your so-called spineless media has been on Bush's ass ever chance it could get since day one. Why do you think they did about forty million Florida recounts and then posted the results (Bush won) so far behind the Obits that almost no one read it?

Why do you thing the Alphabet soup gang, printed 10 negatives on McCain for every negative it did on Obama.

Not true at all. The media cheerleaded Bush into invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.

You cannot claim on the one hand that the media was against Bush and on the other trumpet his high approval ratings after 9/11 and when Iraq was invaded.

Unless you are intellectually dishonest, of course.

 

[Ravi]

I made a mistake.

What made you come to this conclusion?

Leon Panetta. I thought I made that clear. My mistake.

Cute...more progressive BS on your part, I imagine.

 

[Care4all]

If we're counting on the veracity of the CIA to discredit Pelosi, we're counting on an agency with a fifty year history of misleading both Congress and every POTUS they ever worked for.

I have no idea what they told Pelosi, nor do I much care, either. The DEms rolled over and let Bush II's admin do anything it damned well pleased, so their protestations that they didn't know or were mislead simply do not much impress me. They were cowardly and failed to do their jobs in Congress.

But I know damned well that the record of the CIA isn't good when it comes to truth telling.

And if any of you read the history of the CIA, you'll know that too.

Both Republican POTUS and Democratic POTUS distrusted that organization precisely because it lies like a rug.

Nobody has ever considered Leon Panetta to be a man of mixed messages and words.

Was Leon Panetta the CIA head at the time? No.

You don't think what little paperwork they did keep on this, could have been fudged back then?

Leon Panetta and George H W were in 'business' together, both working for/part owners of, the Carlyle Group...probably both are NOCS or were NOCs for the CIA while in the private sector from what I have gathered in readings...? Even if Leon was part of the 'organization' under cover back in 2002, I seriously doubt he got first hand information on this briefing in question, back then....ya know?

And as the head of the CIA he should be defending his men, his crew, his people at the CIA.

What I have heard the media say Panetta said, is that the CIA briefed them accurately on the torture techniques that the administration, through legal consultation, felt were justified and okay to use...this included a thorough description of water boarding.

Pelosi agrees with this...she said she was thoroughly briefed on a classified basis, on the techniques of enhanced interogation that the CIA could use legally, according to the administration. She does NOT deny this, from all the clips I viewed in the media on this?

What she has said in addition to this is that she was not told in this briefing that these enhanced techniques HAD BEEN USED ALREADY or was going to be used in the future, just that the administration believed these enhanced techniques were AVAILABLE for them to use legally if and when they needed to, per the administration.....

She claims that she was NOT TOLD at this briefing on these enhanced techniques that they had ALREADY used them, and HAD waterboarded one specific prisoner, 83 TIMES ALREADY, the previous month....

This is what is at issue here...at least this is what I thought?

And I don't know what leon panetta is reading that tells him for a fact, that she was briefed on them using torture already, the previous month of August, 83 times? I am not even certain leon panetta has backed the CIA up on that minutia of a fact....just the fact that they were briefed on techniques is what he is backing...though i could be wrong on this and haven't caught all the 24/7 skivvy...?

Also, since she was not at the february 03 briefing where they were told the CIA was USING those techniques, Jane Harmon, who was the ranking Democratic member present, wrote a blasting memo to the administration regarding the use of water boarding and it being torture...Pelosi claims this was the appropriate way to go since Jane was the ranking member briefed...

Sooooooo, all this being said and done, it really isn;t that BIG of a deal....EXCEPT, that Pelosi should have made much more of an effort than what she did make, (like supporting all the legislation congress introduced trying to make water boarding illegal that the administration was against...whooped dee doo) regarding the use of water torture...

even if she was not there at this February briefing, she had an assistant there in her place, and as the minority leader she should have approached the administration herself, and she should have seeked the legal means to be able to bring this classified information forward, and not accepted that her lips were required to be sealed, due to its top secret, classified status....

And as far as the Democrats being yellow bellies and cowaring to the administration's every wish, early on....ALL of them, or near ALL of them were just as much lock steppers as the Republicans in office were...it was disgusting...nancy was not alone.

Care

 

[Care4all]

just heard a quote from Panetta writen on a cover note to his statement the other day that the media "forgot" to tell us, saying that CIA RECOLLECTS telling nancy that they tortured already and that he could NOT VOUGE for such but to find out the truth we need an intellgence committee to investigate.

Jay Rockefeller, Jane Harmon, Pelosi and Graham, the people that were supposedly briefed on the Democratic side of the aisle, all side with Nancy...and say they were not briefed either on the CIA using these methods ALREADY.

 

[DiveCon]

just heard a quote from Panetta writen on a cover note to his statement the other day that the media "forgot" to tell us, saying that CIA RECOLLECTS telling nancy that they tortured already and that he could NOT VOUGE for such but to find out the truth we need an intellgence committee to investigate.

Jay Rockefeller, Jane Harmon, Pelosi and Graham, the people that were supposedly briefed on the Democratic side of the aisle, all side with Nancy...and say they were not briefed either on the CIA using these methods ALREADY.

only one problem with that
Porter Goss was WITH Nancy when she was breifed, he says she WAS briefed on it

 

[Care4all]

read this on porter goss/nancy pelosi/cia

another point to make is that all of the republican pundits coming out and blasting nancy, like kit bond and newt gingrich were NOT EVEN THERE or briefed themselves, so how could they POSSIBLY know enough to come out on major media and say what she did was the most outrageous disgusting thing... as newt did?

Porter Goss does NOT say that nancy was briefed that the CIA was using those methods or had used those methods back in september 02 Dive?

Porter Goss Escalates Attacks on Pelosi and Harman–But Admits CIA Broke the Law
By: emptywheel Saturday April 25, 2009 6:10 am 13


Porter Goss--who was DCI when the CIA destroyed videotapes depicting illegal torture and had been warned not to destroy the tapes, and who may have been the "senior CIA official" who allegedly lied to Congress about the torture CIA had done in February and June of 2005--just escalated the Republican attack on Nancy Pelosi and Jane Harman. In an op-ed in the WaPo, he describes the briefing Congress' intelligence leaders received in fall 2002:

Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

•We understood what the CIA was doing.
•We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.
•We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.
•On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

But look carefully at Goss' language describing what they were briefed on.

In the fall of 2002, while I was chairman of the House intelligence committee, senior members of Congress were briefed on the CIA's "High Value Terrorist Program," including the development of "enhanced interrogation techniques" and what those techniques were.

[snip]

Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned.

Goss explains that the Gang of Four was briefed on "the development" of the torture program and "what those techniques were." He implies strongly--but does not say it directly--that "waterboarding" was mentioned specifically. And he complains that the attendees should have understood that "the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed."

Note what Pelosi has said:

"In that or any other briefing...we were not, and I repeat, were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation techniques were used," said Pelosi. "What they did tell us is that they had some legislative counsel...opinions that they could be used, but not that they would."[snip]

"Further to the point was that if and when they would be used, they would brief Congress at that time," said Pelosi. "I know that there's some different interpretations coming out of that meeting. My colleague, the chairman of the [intelligence] committee, has said, well if they say that it's legal you have to know they're going to use it. Well, his experience is that he was a member of the CIA and later went on to head the CIA. Maybe his experience is that they'll tell you one thing but may mean something else."

Pelosi is referring to then-GOP Rep. Porter Goss. "My experience was they did not tell us they were using that, flat out. And any, any contention to the contrary is simply not true," she said.

Porter Goss says Pelosi should have known "the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed." But he doesn't say she should have known "the techniques on which they were briefed had already been employed." Which is a critical part of her complaint--that CIA did not tell Congress that waterboarding and other techniques "were used" ... that "they were using that." This briefing is always described as occuring in "fall 2002." Even interpreting "fall" broadly to include all of September, that means the briefing took place after they had already waterboarded Abu Zubaydah 83 times in a month.

So whether or not Pelosi is arguing "waterboarding" was mentioned or not, even Goss appears to confirm one of Pelosi's main points. The CIA did not reveal this was already taking place. Even in Goss' understanding, they revealed only that waterboarding "was to be employed"--in the future.

In addition, Goss scoffs at what he calls Memoranda for the Record filed in secret.

And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted.

This may refer to a Pelosi memorandum, or it may refer to Jane Harman's letter to CIA Counsel Scott Muller, in which Harman raised clear policy objections to the torture program.

It is also the case, however, that what was described raises profound policy questions and I am concerned about whether these have been as rigorously examined as the legal questions. I would like to know what kind of policy review took place and what questions were examined. In particular, I would like to know whether the most senior levels of the White House have determined that these practices are consistent with the principles and policies of the United States. Have enhanced techniques been authorized and approved by the President?

You discussed the fact that there is videotape of Abu Zubaydah following his capture that will be destroyed after the Inspector General finishes his inquiry. I would urge the Agency to reconsider that plan. Even if the videotape does not constitute an official record that must be preserved under the law, the videotape would be the best proof that the written record is accurate, if such record is called into question in the future. The fact of destruction would reflect badly on the Agency.

But note--Harman's letter was an immediate expression to the CIA Director expressing real concern. Pelosi at least claims to have concurred with that expression of concern. And Muller's response to Harman? Nada

(Actually, now that I look at it that's not true--Muller does respond, but he refuses to tell her about the policy background: "While I do not think it appropriate for me to comment on issues that are a matter of policy, much less the nature and extent of Executive Branch policy deliberations, I think it would be fair to assume that policy as well as legal matters have been addressed within the Executive Branch.")

Now, setting aside Pelosi's and Goss' differing understanding of the fall 2002 briefing for a moment, note what Goss, even with his version, also admits to.

Even according to Goss' version, just the the Chairs and Ranking Members of the two intelligence committees attended the briefing (though he tries to imply, with his "senior members of Congress," that it was more than that). Not the Majority and Minority Leaders of the House and Senate, as required by law. Briefing just the Gang of Four--and not the full Gang of Eight--is a violation of the law. After all, Pelosi couldn't have complained to the House minority leader (Dick Gephardt at the time), because he had not been briefed on the program!!

So while Goss seems intent on escalating his attempts to implicate Pelosi and Harman in his own complicity with the CIA's torture program, in doing so he admits that CIA broke the law, twice, in its briefing of Congress. It did not brief Congress before it started the torture (and recall, we know the torture had been contemplated since at least April, so they can't claim they didn't have time to inform Congress beforehand). And, the CIA failed to meet the legal requirements on informing Congress by including Congressional leadership as well as intelligence leadership.

Update: The SSCI narrative makes it clear that the briefing of the Senate intelligence leaders, at least, happened after they had already waterboarded Abu Zubaydah.

In the fall of 2002, after the use of interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah, CIA records indicate that the CIA briefed the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee on the interrogation.

[snip]

Just as the statement does not purport to identify all Executive Branch meetings and documents on the CIA detention and interrogation program, the statement does not purport to describe either all Executive Branch communications or briefings to the Committee about, or the limitations on the Committee’s use of and access to information about, the CIA’s program.

The second half of that quote--which is a footnote--suggests the Republicans may have gotten more (or there may have been complaints), and that there were at least complaints about how the intell leaders could use the information.Emptywheel » Porter Goss Escalates Attacks on Pelosi and Harman–But Admits CIA Broke the Law

I think we need to get to the bottom of this...i do not rule out that the CIA could have possibly RECOLLECTED, incorectly, nor do I rule out that Nancy recollects the situation incorrectly...why not try to find out?

Care

 

[DiveCon]

read this on porter goss/nancy pelosi/cia

another point to make is that all of the republican pundits coming out and blasting nancy, like kit bond and newt gingrich were NOT EVEN THERE or briefed themselves, so how could they POSSIBLY know enough to come out on major media and say what she did was the most outrageous disgusting thing... as newt did?

Porter Goss does NOT say that nancy was briefed that the CIA was using those methods or had used those methods back in september 02 Dive?

Porter Goss Escalates Attacks on Pelosi and Harman–But Admits CIA Broke the Law
By: emptywheel Saturday April 25, 2009 6:10 am 13


Porter Goss--who was DCI when the CIA destroyed videotapes depicting illegal torture and had been warned not to destroy the tapes, and who may have been the "senior CIA official" who allegedly lied to Congress about the torture CIA had done in February and June of 2005--just escalated the Republican attack on Nancy Pelosi and Jane Harman. In an op-ed in the WaPo, he describes the briefing Congress' intelligence leaders received in fall 2002:

Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:

The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

•We understood what the CIA was doing.
•We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.
•We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.
•On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

But look carefully at Goss' language describing what they were briefed on.

In the fall of 2002, while I was chairman of the House intelligence committee, senior members of Congress were briefed on the CIA's "High Value Terrorist Program," including the development of "enhanced interrogation techniques" and what those techniques were.

[snip]

Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as "waterboarding" were never mentioned.

Goss explains that the Gang of Four was briefed on "the development" of the torture program and "what those techniques were." He implies strongly--but does not say it directly--that "waterboarding" was mentioned specifically. And he complains that the attendees should have understood that "the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed."

Note what Pelosi has said:

"In that or any other briefing...we were not, and I repeat, were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation techniques were used," said Pelosi. "What they did tell us is that they had some legislative counsel...opinions that they could be used, but not that they would."[snip]

"Further to the point was that if and when they would be used, they would brief Congress at that time," said Pelosi. "I know that there's some different interpretations coming out of that meeting. My colleague, the chairman of the [intelligence] committee, has said, well if they say that it's legal you have to know they're going to use it. Well, his experience is that he was a member of the CIA and later went on to head the CIA. Maybe his experience is that they'll tell you one thing but may mean something else."

Pelosi is referring to then-GOP Rep. Porter Goss. "My experience was they did not tell us they were using that, flat out. And any, any contention to the contrary is simply not true," she said.

Porter Goss says Pelosi should have known "the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed." But he doesn't say she should have known "the techniques on which they were briefed had already been employed." Which is a critical part of her complaint--that CIA did not tell Congress that waterboarding and other techniques "were used" ... that "they were using that." This briefing is always described as occuring in "fall 2002." Even interpreting "fall" broadly to include all of September, that means the briefing took place after they had already waterboarded Abu Zubaydah 83 times in a month.

So whether or not Pelosi is arguing "waterboarding" was mentioned or not, even Goss appears to confirm one of Pelosi's main points. The CIA did not reveal this was already taking place. Even in Goss' understanding, they revealed only that waterboarding "was to be employed"--in the future.

In addition, Goss scoffs at what he calls Memoranda for the Record filed in secret.

And for those who now reveal filed "memorandums for the record" suggesting concern, real concern should have been expressed immediately -- to the committee chairs, the briefers, the House speaker or minority leader, the CIA director or the president's national security adviser -- and not quietly filed away in case the day came when the political winds shifted.

This may refer to a Pelosi memorandum, or it may refer to Jane Harman's letter to CIA Counsel Scott Muller, in which Harman raised clear policy objections to the torture program.

It is also the case, however, that what was described raises profound policy questions and I am concerned about whether these have been as rigorously examined as the legal questions. I would like to know what kind of policy review took place and what questions were examined. In particular, I would like to know whether the most senior levels of the White House have determined that these practices are consistent with the principles and policies of the United States. Have enhanced techniques been authorized and approved by the President?

You discussed the fact that there is videotape of Abu Zubaydah following his capture that will be destroyed after the Inspector General finishes his inquiry. I would urge the Agency to reconsider that plan. Even if the videotape does not constitute an official record that must be preserved under the law, the videotape would be the best proof that the written record is accurate, if such record is called into question in the future. The fact of destruction would reflect badly on the Agency.

But note--Harman's letter was an immediate expression to the CIA Director expressing real concern. Pelosi at least claims to have concurred with that expression of concern. And Muller's response to Harman? Nada

(Actually, now that I look at it that's not true--Muller does respond, but he refuses to tell her about the policy background: "While I do not think it appropriate for me to comment on issues that are a matter of policy, much less the nature and extent of Executive Branch policy deliberations, I think it would be fair to assume that policy as well as legal matters have been addressed within the Executive Branch.")

Now, setting aside Pelosi's and Goss' differing understanding of the fall 2002 briefing for a moment, note what Goss, even with his version, also admits to.

Even according to Goss' version, just the the Chairs and Ranking Members of the two intelligence committees attended the briefing (though he tries to imply, with his "senior members of Congress," that it was more than that). Not the Majority and Minority Leaders of the House and Senate, as required by law. Briefing just the Gang of Four--and not the full Gang of Eight--is a violation of the law. After all, Pelosi couldn't have complained to the House minority leader (Dick Gephardt at the time), because he had not been briefed on the program!!

So while Goss seems intent on escalating his attempts to implicate Pelosi and Harman in his own complicity with the CIA's torture program, in doing so he admits that CIA broke the law, twice, in its briefing of Congress. It did not brief Congress before it started the torture (and recall, we know the torture had been contemplated since at least April, so they can't claim they didn't have time to inform Congress beforehand). And, the CIA failed to meet the legal requirements on informing Congress by including Congressional leadership as well as intelligence leadership.

Update: The SSCI narrative makes it clear that the briefing of the Senate intelligence leaders, at least, happened after they had already waterboarded Abu Zubaydah.

In the fall of 2002, after the use of interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah, CIA records indicate that the CIA briefed the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee on the interrogation.

[snip]

Just as the statement does not purport to identify all Executive Branch meetings and documents on the CIA detention and interrogation program, the statement does not purport to describe either all Executive Branch communications or briefings to the Committee about, or the limitations on the Committee’s use of and access to information about, the CIA’s program.

The second half of that quote--which is a footnote--suggests the Republicans may have gotten more (or there may have been complaints), and that there were at least complaints about how the intell leaders could use the information.Emptywheel » Porter Goss Escalates Attacks on Pelosi and Harman–But Admits CIA Broke the Law

I think we need to get to the bottom of this...i do not rule out that the CIA could have possibly RECOLLECTED, incorectly, nor do I rule out that Nancy recollects the situation incorrectly...why not try to find out?

Care

actually, my reading of that says exactly what i said he said

 

[oreo]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/15/ar2009051502743.html

The article in the Washington Post

Panetta, whom President Obama tapped to lead the CIA this year, reasserted the agency's claim that it told congressional leaders about the use of such methods during a closed-door briefing in September 2002.

Pelosi (D-Calif.) has acknowledged attending the briefing but says she was told only that the CIA was considering the use of waterboarding.

"It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress," Panetta said in a message meant to shore up employees of his agency, which is at the center of a relentless political firestorm over Bush policies and the Iraq war. "Our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of [terrorism suspect] Abu Zubaida, describing the 'enhanced techniques that had been employed.' "

The dispute over Pelosi's knowledge of the interrogation techniques leaves the Obama administration caught between the speaker, a strong advocate of the president's agenda on Capitol Hill, and the CIA, an agency Obama has defended even as he has described its interrogation methods as torture and released Justice Department memos that drew more focus on those methods.

The president, however, has also strongly resisted calls for the creation of a truth commission, something Pelosi has vocally supported/ Such a panel, Obama has said, would devolve into partisan finger-pointing.

The White House saw no value in weighing in on Pelosi and the CIA yesterday. Spokesman Robert Gibbs declined to comment at his daily briefing, telling reporters, "I appreciate the invitation to get involved, but I'll decline to RSVP."

Meanwhile, an administration ready to tackle campaign priorities such as health care and climate change remains mired in issues left over from the Bush administration. Besides the debate over interrogations, Obama continues to wrestle with how to handle detainees at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a facility he ordered closed by next year. This week he drew fire from the American Civil Liberties Union and others after reversing his support for the release of additional photos of prisoner abuse, and for his announcement yesterday that he will retain and revamp the system of military tribunals to try detainees.


Some liberal activists have said the controversy over what Pelosi knew illustrates the need for a commission to investigate alleged abuses of the Bush administration.

A day after she accused the CIA and the Bush administration of "misleading the Congress," Pelosi defended her charge that she had not been properly briefed, but sought to blame the Bush administration instead of the CIA.

"We all share great respect for the dedicated men and women of the intelligence community who are deeply committed to the safety and security of the American people," Pelosi said in a statement released by her office. "My criticism of the manner in which the Bush Administration did not appropriately inform Congress is separate from my respect for those in the intelligence community who work to keep our country safe."

I think this is the 6th time Pelosi has changed her statement?

 

[oreo]

just heard a quote from Panetta writen on a cover note to his statement the other day that the media "forgot" to tell us, saying that CIA RECOLLECTS telling nancy that they tortured already and that he could NOT VOUGE for such but to find out the truth we need an intellgence committee to investigate.

Jay Rockefeller, Jane Harmon, Pelosi and Graham, the people that were supposedly briefed on the Democratic side of the aisle, all side with Nancy...and say they were not briefed either on the CIA using these methods ALREADY.

Democrats playing politics with national security. Does this surprise you at all? BTW--IT IS A FELONY FOR THE CIA TO LIE TO CONGRESS.
Nancy Pelosi changing her story--at least 6 times now--says it all. She's lying. You tell one lie--you're going to tell another 20 to cover up the first one. As far as the others--they're just trying to cover her BUTT along with their own.

 

[DiveCon]

just heard a quote from Panetta writen on a cover note to his statement the other day that the media "forgot" to tell us, saying that CIA RECOLLECTS telling nancy that they tortured already and that he could NOT VOUGE for such but to find out the truth we need an intellgence committee to investigate.

Jay Rockefeller, Jane Harmon, Pelosi and Graham, the people that were supposedly briefed on the Democratic side of the aisle, all side with Nancy...and say they were not briefed either on the CIA using these methods ALREADY.

SOME Democrats playing politics with national security. Does this surprise you at all?

fixed

remember Panetta is also a democrat