[UPDATE] Welcome, Anchoress readers.
In reviewing Dan Balz’s article on Pelosi’s ongoing meltdown, Ed notes:
Balz does his best to stay within the non-judgmental vocabulary to describe Pelosi’s latest story on her complicity in the enhanced interrogation techniques used by the CIA, but how does one objectively describe how someone has taken their credibility onto a dais and beaten it to death with a microphone?
I wish that I had written that.
Crossposted to RedState.
[UPDATE] Welcome, Instapundit readers. The theme song for this affair is here.
…he’s been getting briefings from them for decades, with no complaints:
Ed Morrissey heard laughter in the above: I’m not as sure, but if it is there it’s both understandable and justified. Joe Lieberman’s taken a lot of garbage from Pelosi’s ideological cohorts over the years, and even though he’s easily given better than he’s gotten the thought of a little more payback is clearly not an unwelcome one. In fact, I think that Lieberman’s enjoying this more than the neocons are, and we’re wondering whether Hoyer’s going to try to get Pelosi removed, or just neutralized.
Personally, I’m for a nice grudge war where I can root for injuries.
Moe Lane
Watching the video (H/T: AoSHQ) of the press conference was fascinating, particularly the parts where the Speaker of the House kept harping on weapons of mass destruction as if the subject was relevant. She looked for all the world like a pigeon who had been trained to peck at a button in exchange for birdseed; only, she kept pecking the button, and no birdseed was coming out…
Crossposted to RedState.
A pair of stories (HT: Hot Air Headlines, here and here) illustrate the sudden appearance of troubles for the Speaker of the House rather neatly. First, the general:
Democrats: CIA is out to get us
Democrats charged Tuesday that the CIA has released documents about congressional briefings on harsh interrogation techniques in order to deflect attention and blame away from itself.
and now, the specific:
Source: Aide told Pelosi waterboarding had been used
WASHINGTON (CNN) — A source close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi now confirms that Pelosi was told in February 2003 by her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, that waterboarding was actually used on CIA detainee Abu Zubaydah.
This appears to contradict Pelosi’s account that she was never told waterboarding actually happened, only that the administration was considering using it.
Which is a nice way of putting it*. Continue reading Strictly business, Madam Speaker.
It sort of stops working after the third try, you know.
The Speaker of the House has come up with yet another reason for why she didn’t say anything about waterboarding at the time:
Pelosi defense: couldn’t object in ’03
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi learned in early 2003 that the Bush administration was waterboarding terror detainees but didn’t protest directly out of respect for “appropriate” legislative channels, a person familiar with the situation said Monday.
The Pelosi camp’s version of events is intended to answer two key questions posed by her critics: When, precisely, did she first learn about waterboarding? And why didn’t she do more to stop it?
Because, apparently, “All along” and “because it didn’t poll well at the time” won’t satisfy anybody at this point. Both Cold Fury and AoSHQ have a good deal of righteous scorn on this one; I’m just going to touch fairly briefly on what this means, going forward. Continue reading Speaker Pelosi has a new excuse for not opposing waterboarding.
I said, ‘dumber than soap’ once*. I stand by that statement.
(Via Hot Air Headlines) John Feehery, in the process of pointing out five reasons why we’re not dead yet as a party, noted this little comment by our illustrious Speaker of the House:
“It is important for us to have a strong Republican Party,” Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi tauntingly told a press conference on April 23. “And I hope that the next generation will take back the Republican Party for the Grand Old Party that it used to be.”
Well, since we’re discussing our hopes, Speaker, I have one of my own. I hope, someday, to have someone in your current job who can keep his or her story straight.
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.
Pelosi issued a statement after CIA records released this week showed that Pelosi was briefed in September 2002 on the interrogation methods. The briefings memo appeared to contradict the speaker’s claims that she was never told that waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation methods were being used.
“We were not — I repeat — were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used,” Pelosi said on April 23.
The emphasis seems to be on “were used,” even though she conceded in a statement released Friday that she was told they would be used.
Speaker Pelosi, you hold the position once held by Joe Cannon, Henry Clay, Nicolas Longworth, Tip O’Neill, and Sam Rayburn. They were not all good people, all of them; but they were all effective, and they were none of them prone to panic in a tricky situation.
You do not measure up.
Moe Lane
*See here. And, of course, here.
Crossposted to Moe Lane.
Hi, Activist Left.
[Further UPDATE]: Welcome, Instapundit readers. Umm. I dunno. Zombie MMORPG, maybe?
[UPDATE] You’d think that they thought that none of this would ever come out.
—–
Pelosi knew about the waterboarding.
According to the memo the very first briefing listed is 9/4/02 with then Rep. Porter Goss & Pelosi. The summary of the briefing says:
“Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed.”
This directly contradicts Pelosi’s story, that “we were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used.“
And here’s the important thing: we knew this already, and so did you. You’ve been lying to the American people about this for six or so years solely because that way you could maybe stop the screaming that was going on in your own head. It didn’t work, but then, it never was going to: you really shouldn’t have tried it in the first place. Continue reading Pelosi. Knew. [Bumped.]
This will do. For a start. Via Geraghty:
Watchdog Groups Join Calls for PMA Probe
House Democratic leaders face new pressure from four watchdog groups usually allied with them to open an investigation into the ties between three powerful Democrats and the now-defunct lobbying firm The PMA Group.
Democracy 21, Common Cause, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG on Thursday called on the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to probe the relationship PMA had with Democratic Reps. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania, Peter J. Visclosky of Indiana and James P. Moran of Virginia. The lawmakers secured lucrative earmarks for defense contractors represented by The PMA Group and received political donations from family members of the lobbying firm’s founder.
As the article notes – and has been noted in the past – this issue has been brought up numerous times by Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), and Speaker Pelosi and the rest of her crew keep squashing it. It’s going to be harder to do that going forward, if groups like US PIRG are going to be pushing the issue. Of course, it’s entirely possible that what the normally Democratic-allied groups are doing here is trying to create a firebreak; get a few of the absolute worst cases tossed overboard and claim it’s a housecleaning.
I hope not – I like to think the best of people, for as long as I can – but even if it is a cynical ploy I’d still favor running with it. After all, there’s no guarantee that said cynical ploy would work.
Moe Lane
Crossposted to RedState.
‘Truth’ is precisely what the Democrats don’t want right now.
Senate Democratic leaders oppose the immediate establishment of a “Truth Commission” to probe harsh interrogation tactics as they face pressure to reveal what they knew of practices the Obama administration has since labeled “torture.”
While nearly all Democrats this week backed the creation of a special commission to probe the causes of the financial crisis, and while the party previously supported the independent 9/11 Commission, its leaders on Thursday balked at the idea of taking a similar approach to unearthing answers about the controversial interrogation methods approved by the Bush administration.
There’s actually a fairly significant difference between investigating ‘the causes of the financial crisis’ and investigating ‘controversial interrogation methods’: no, not the fact that Democrats were only up to their eyeballs in one or the other. They were, of course, heavily involved in both. No, the difference is that in the case of the financial crisis there is actually a national consensus that the end result was bad. The same consensus does not agree on the interrogation methods*. Continue reading Of *course* ‘Leaders balk at setting up truth panel.’
So, let us review the bidding on the AIG bonus scandal, and who’s being blamed for it.
The Senate, in the person of Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), is blaming the executive branch, pretty explicitly.
The House, in the person of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), is likewise blaming the executive branch – but she’s also blaming the Senate.
The White House doesn’t want to blame anybody… but AIG is like a suicide bomber (H/T Hot Air), and a “senior government official” is just plain “outraged” at that awful Congress for passing this. But Obama’s not about pointing fingers about how it could be the Republican’s fault – which is good, because as Ace points out our only contribution to this mess was Senator Olympia Snowe’s (R-ME) language in the debt bill that would have prevented these bonuses in the first place (that was before Dodd/Geithner/The White House/The Easter Bunny took them out, of course). Nope. It’s all Obama’s responsibility – but not his fault!
Continue reading A recap of the AIG Bonus Blame Party.
I’m going to put up the full text of the Vatican’s statement about Nancy Pelosi’s visit with the Pope, because I suspect that they want this put out there:
Following the General Audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Mrs Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage.
His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”
Continue reading Pope makes firm statement to Pelosi on abortion.
