Pelosi was particularly harsh in describing the CIA

[mheslep]

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmM4NjlkNDNlMjJlZjliZjI4OWY5MmQxODZjYjI1MmI

From an ex-CIA guy.

And for which the previous paragraph was

Mrs. Pelosi and other partisan Democrats have always taken at face value anything the CIA has leaked that has put Republicans on the defensive. The CIA’s leaks on interrogations, the Plame incident, and its faulty intelligence on Iraqi WMDs may have contributed more to Democrats’ electoral victory than any other single interest group — more than ACORN, more than the teachers’ unions. Until now, Pelosi has thrived upon CIA dysfunction, and she has ignored the need for broader systemic change at the CIA, change that is necessary to protect the lives of Americans and our allies.

 

[LowlyPion]

And for which the previous paragraph was

Your point is ... ?

That Pelosi knows the CIA dissembles and uses it when it suits her purposes? So?

As opposed to the Cheney Bush brain trust that used knowingly unverified information from the CIA to drag the country to war?

It certainly fails to invalidate her claim that the CIA dissembles and deceives Congress. It certainly fails to suggest anything but that her account about not being properly informed about the waterboarding is the likely true situation.

 

[LowlyPion]

With regard to Pelosi, I noted this little sidelight.

The Republican National Committee published a 007 knockoff ad tastelessly linking Nancy Pelosi to kitty Galore. Now it seems they are trying to backtrack from their faux pas. They have removed the video from YouTube, and now are exercising their copyright to it in order to suppress it.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0509/RNC_asserts_copyright_to_remove_Pelosi_video_again.html

Someone needs to tell them that exercising copyrights doesn't unring the bell. Maybe if they manned up and admitted their patently clear poor judgment in making and airing the ad in the first place, they could put it in the rear view mirror?

The result now is a new ad to the music O Fortuna evoking atomic weapons and trying to implicate by inference Pelosi.

Is the idea that putting out a string of stupid ads, will somehow diminish the boorishness of the first Pelosi attack ad?

 

[LowlyPion]

Say it ain't so. Maybe Pelosi wasn't harsh enough?:

Democrats Say C.I.A. Deceived Congress
WASHINGTON — The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta, has told the House Intelligence Committee in closed-door testimony that the C.I.A. concealed "significant actions" from Congress from 2001 until late last month, seven Democratic committee members said.

... 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."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/us/politics/09intel.html

 

[LowlyPion]

Looks like the CIA had some help in withholding information from Congress. Now we find that not only did they intentionally withhold, but were ordered to do so by Dick Cheney.

Senator: Cheney and alleged secret CIA program 'a problem'

... Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, told the "FOX News Sunday" program that Panetta testified that "he was told that the vice president had ordered that the program not be briefed to the Congress."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/11/cheney.surveillance/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Maybe Cheney's remarks about the Obama Administration making America less safe is really more that America is becoming less safe for him, if he gets called to account for ordering the CIA to break the Law.

 

[WhoWee]

Maybe Pelosi will have a chance to testify afterall?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26396.html