LowlyPion said:
Porter Goss's article serves no purpose in this regard.
A) She has been saying from the beginning she was briefed once.
The CIA Briefing Memo exactly relates that she was briefed only once. Aside from Sept 4, 2002, she is not otherwise identified as briefed according to the released CIA Memo.
B) Porter Goss dissembles in that article by talking about multiple briefings, that he attended, yet does not offer any evidence that Nancy Pelosi was briefed more than she has readily disclosed. The CIA Briefing Memo shows that Porter Goss was briefed more than once, but not Nancy Pelosi. As to exactly what Nancy Pelosi was told on Sept. 4, 2002 he is silent. I'd say in later briefings water-boarding may have been disclosed and discussed, but the CIA doesn't necessarily place Pelosi at any briefing where it would have been disclosed.
C) Abu Zabaidah was subjected to some of the EITs as of September 4, 2002 that were sanctioned by the scandalously poor legal opinion by Bybee, but apparently not all of the techniques would have been employed. Otherwise the notation would have been less descriptive and limiting as to what was described. There is no indication which of the 10 EITs was used. From all evidence that I have seen Abu Zabadiah wasn't water boarded until after August of 2002, when the FBI disassociated themselves from the interrogation. If he had been being water-boarded in interrogations referenced by the FBI, they would have noted that, as they did the other less ultimate EITs than water-boarding.
D) Finally Porter Goss himself as an ex-CIA Chief and as a Republican ready to close ranks with the likes of Dick Cheney with regards to the torture that the Bush-Cheney subjected detainees to, simply cannot be trusted. If you read that account there is nothing that is apparently actionable as untruthful by its assertion, but there is by its omission unfortunate lack of clarification, in not saying that he would only have been aware of Pelosi being at the first briefing.
She opened this can of worms...again...why does she need to lie? By the way...where are her defenders (other than LP)?
Pelosi Denies Knowing Interrogation Techniques Were Used
By Paul Kane
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) today said congressional leaders were never briefed about the use of an enhanced interrogation practice, rejecting GOP claims that leadership was aware of the controversial tactics by late 2002.
Pelosi said the select few lawmakers who were briefed about handling of detainees from the war on terror, were then forbidden from discussing what they had learned with their colleagues. This produced an environment in which the top lawmakers were told of the existence of legal opinions supporting the rationale for waterboarding detainees, but never told that it was actually being used, according to Pelosi.
"Flat out, they never briefed us that this was happening," she said.
In late 2002, Pelosi was the ranking member of the House intelligence committee, while Porter Goss (R-Fla.) was chairman, when they first learned of the general nature of the interrogation techniques that were under consideration by the CIA's top officials. They were part of the so-called "Gang of Four" briefings given to the top members of the intelligence panels in the House and Senate.
Pelosi continued receiving highly classified briefings when she became Democratic leader in 2003, as is custom to brief the top Democrat and Republican in each of the two chambers.
Republicans have repeatedly cited these briefings to reject calls from Pelosi and many congressional Democrats to create a "truth commission" to investigate alleged abuses in interrogations. Those calls grew louder after last week's release of the legal memos that the Bush administration used, from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, to explain what was allowed and what would break international anti-torture laws.
"All of this information was downloaded to congressional leaders of both parties with no objections being raised," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters today,
specifically citing Pelosi as someone who received the briefings. "Not a word was raised at the time, not one word."
Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich), the ranking member of the House intelligence panel, argued the same point in an op-ed in today's Wall Street Journal.
Pelosi denied these claims.
"We were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used. What they did tell us is that they had . . . the Office of Legal Counsel opinions [and] that they could be used, but not that they would," she said.
She said some officials, such as Goss, who went on to become CIA director, argued the lawmakers should have known the waterboarding would be used because they were told it was a legal practice. But she said they had no way of knowing that for certain, and they were then forbidden from talking about what they had learned so they could not work to outlaw the practice.
She summed up the briefings this way: "This is what they're doing. That's all they do. They don't come into consult. They come into notify. They come into notify. And you can't -- you can't change what they're doing unless you can act as a committee or as a class. You can't change what they're doing."
Here is more
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E4BB6FE2-18FE-70B2-A86BE8DB9E8BEABD
Pelosi playing defense on torture
By: Glenn Thrush
April 27, 2009 04:33 AM EST
Nancy Pelosi didn’t cry foul when the Bush administration briefed her on “enhanced interrogation” of terror suspects in 2002, but her team was locked and loaded to counter hypocrisy charges when the “torture” memos were released last week.
Many Republicans obliged, led by former CIA chief Porter Goss, who is accusing Democrats like Pelosi of “amnesia” for demanding investigations in 2009 after failing to raise objections seven years ago when she first learned of the legal basis for the program.
“As soon as the president made the decision to release [the memos], I was telling people that the Republicans were going to come after us, saying she knew about it and did nothing,” said an adviser to Pelosi (D-Calif.), speaking on condition of anonymity. “And I’m sure we’re going to get hammered again when they release all those new torture photos,” the person said.
But Pelosi’s allies were less prepared to confront the fallout from her convoluted answers during three sessions with reporters last week — answers that raised new questions and handed Republicans a fresh line of attack on a speaker at the height of her power.
“I’m puzzled, I don’t understand what she’s trying to say,” said Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.), former chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and currently the committee’s ranking minority member.
“I don’t have any sympathy for her — she’s the speaker of the House; there should be some accountability. She shouldn’t be given a pass,” added Hoekstra.
Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) promised to keep up the heat, telling reporters last week,
“She and other leaders were fully briefed on all of these interrogation techniques. There’s nothing here that should surprise her.”
Democrats dismiss such talk as a sideshow, arguing that the criticism of Pelosi is nothing compared with the long-term damage done to Republicans by the disclosure of Bush administration interrogation abuses.
“The Republicans may have won a news cycle, but we’re doing what we want to do,” said Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly, pointing to Pelosi’s legislative successes during President Barack Obama’s first 100 days in office.
Nonetheless, Pelosi finds herself on the defensive at a time when she needs to be on the offensive, pushing through a record-breaking budget, health care reform, a controversial cap-and-trade proposal and a supplemental funding bill for Iraq and Afghanistan.
To make matters worse, Pelosi’s troubles cast renewed scrutiny on her fraught relationship with Rep. Jane Harman, the hyperkinetic California Democrat who lobbied her relentlessly — and unsuccessfully — to become Intelligence Committee chairwoman in 2006.
A week ago, Congressional Quarterly reported that Harman had been secretly wiretapped by Bush administration intelligence officials and was overheard promising a suspected Israeli agent she would advocate on behalf of two pro-Israel lobbyists accused of espionage.
In return, CQ reported, the agent promised to enlist Pelosi’s friend Haim Saban to pressure the speaker to tap Harman as committee chair by threatening to withhold contributions. Nothing became of the scheme, and Pelosi says Saban, a billionaire and major Democratic benefactor, never strong-armed her.
At a roundtable discussion with reporters in her office on Wednesday, Pelosi claimed government officials had told her “maybe three years ago” that Harman had been bugged — but indicated she hadn’t been told of the content of the recorded conversation.
A day later, CQ reporter Jeff Stein cited three former intelligence officials who contradicted that account, saying Pelosi was, in fact, told of the substance of the wiretap.
Daly said the speaker stood by her version of events.
Pelosi also complicated matters at the roundtable by telling reporters, “Many, many, many of Jane’s friends talked to me about her being named chair of the committee” and scoffed at Harman backers’ charge that she had been promised the post.
“I’ve heard some people say to me, ‘Oh, she was promised in writing she would be the chairman’ — completely not so,” Pelosi said.
That, in turn, sparked public pushback by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), Pelosi’s No. 2, who pointed to a 1999 letter from then-House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt promising Pelosi the intelligence post.
House Democrats say the Harman matter is likely to blow over fairly soon. More serious, they say, are questions raised by Pelosi’s knowledge of the torture memos.
Pelosi supports the creation of a “Truth Commission” to root out wrongdoing by the Bush administration on interrogations — putting her at odds with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Obama, who want the matter dealt with exclusively by congressional committees.
That has sparked charges of hypocrisy.
Republicans have been circulating a December 2007 Washington Post report that quoted Bush administration officials saying
Pelosi did little to block “enhanced interrogation techniques” in 2002 when she was briefed as the ranking Democrat on the Intelligence Committee.
At a press briefing last week — one she hoped would focus on the legislative accomplishments in Obama’s first 100 days — Pelosi said she didn’t raise objections because intelligence officials didn’t divulge they had actually begun using the techniques at the time of the briefing.
“We were not — I repeat — were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used,” she said.
However, that account seemed to be contradicted by a Senate Intelligence Committee timeline that found House leaders were briefed “in the fall of 2002, after the use of interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaida. CIA records indicate that the CIA briefed the chairman and vice chairman of the committee on the interrogation.”
And Porter Goss, who was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee when Pelosi was the ranking member, made the same point in a Saturday Washington Post op-ed.
“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,” Goss wrote. “I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues.”
Pelosi dismissed such criticism, telling reporters the 2002 briefing was strictly classified, and she was hamstrung from raising objections with officials or even sharing information with other lower-ranking committee members.
And Pelosi says that Democrats did raise red flags when the extent of the administration’s program became apparent.
In an e-mail to reporters, Pelosi said that Harman — who replaced her as the ranking Democrat on the intelligence committee in 2003 — “filed a letter in early 2003 to the CIA to protest the use of such techniques, a protest with which I concurred.”
But Hoekstra, a frequent Pelosi critic who supported most Bush administration policies, said he has often raised objections to officials during intelligence briefings and shared his misgivings with his leadership.
“I’ve never felt hamstrung,” he said. “If there were things I heard that made me nervous, I’d tell John Boehner or [former Speaker Dennis Hastert], ‘You guys have to get briefed up on this because I’m uncomfortable with what I heard.’ ... It was my job to let my boss know so that he could take what he believes is appropriate action.”
© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC
