Gingrich: Only Republicans — Like Me — Are Allowed To Accuse The CIA Of Misleading Congress
Gingrich: Only Republicans — Like Me — Are Allowed To Accuse The CIA Of Misleading Congress
This morning, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich went on ABC’s Good Morning America and called on Democrats to pressure Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to resign her position as Speaker. He claimed that she has “disqualified herself” for the leadership spot, because “if I were a person trying to defend this country, I’d have very little confidence that the Speaker of the House had any regard for what we were doing.”
Host Diane Sawyer challenged Gingrich, noting that he never criticized Rep. Peter Hoekstra’s (R-MI) repeated criticism of the agency, including this statement in 2007: “We cannot have an intelligence community that covers up what it does and then lies to Congress.” Gingrich struggled uncomfortably and repeatedly attempted to change the subject:
GINGRICH: Well, in that case, he’s writing a specific letter asking them to change something they were doing. He did not say the CIA routinely lies —
SAWYER: “Lies,” he said —
GINGRICH: — to the Congress.
SAWYER: Well, he says “lies.” He says “what it does and then lies to Congress.”
GINGRICH: And I think they actually had to come back and testify.
Watch it:
But more hypocritical than his silence in response to Hoekstra’s criticisms of the CIA is the fact that in 2007 Gingrich himself accused the CIA, among other U.S. intelligence agencies, of not just misleading Congress but actively undermining the President of the United States. In response to the release of the 2007 Iran National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) — which concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program — Gingrich said that he believed the NIE and its authors were “damaging to our own national security”:
[The NIE] is so professionally unworthy, so intellectually indefensible and so fundamentally misleading that it is damaging to our national security.
The NIE appears to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the policies of President Bush by members of his own government by suggesting that Iran no longer poses a serious threat to U.S. national security because we apparently have credible reports that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
While Gingrich claimed to be aiming his criticisms at “partisan State Department bureaucrats,” the reality is that the NIE was compiled and authored by the Director of National Intelligence and the National Intelligence Council, in which the CIA plays an integral role. It was regarded as the “intelligence community’s most authoritative and coordinated written assessment” of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
Transcript:
SAWYER: Former Speaker, political gladiator, Newt Gingrich, here with us this morning. We heard about, we heard you were saying it, we saw that you were writing it. What do you want to happen?
GINGRICH: Well, I think that with Speaker Pelosi’s comments last Thursday, particularly the ones in which she alleged that the Central Intelligence Agency routinely lies to Congress, that she really disqualified herself to be Speaker. I mean, there’s no problem with her being a member of the House, but —
SAWYER: So you think —
GINGRICH: I think the Democrats should get a new Speaker. [...]
SAWYER: But as you know, some people have said that you’re doing this for political reasons. It’s really a political salvo that you’re hurling at her and a kind of double standard. For instance, Congressman Peter Hoekstra, who is head of the House Intelligence Committee at the time, wrote a letter in which he, on another issue, said this about the CIA: “We cannot have an intelligence community that covers up what it does and then lies to Congress.” That’s a Republican saying it and they’re saying, “Where were you then? You didn’t call for him to resign.”
GINGRICH: Well, I think in that particular he’s fighting with them over a particular report he wants. This is about a year and a half ago. But I’ve had a similar standard of toughness with Republicans on other issues. For example, Secretary Paulson, when I thought he was failing as Secretary of the Treasury.
SAWYER: So should he [Hoekstra] be repudiated for those words too?
GINGRICH: Well, in that case, he’s writing a specific letter asking them to change something they were doing. He did not say the CIA routinely lies —
SAWYER: “Lies,” he said —
GINGRICH: — to the Congress.
SAWYER: Well, he says “lies.” He says “what it does and then lies to Congress.”
GINGRICH: And I think they actually had to come back and testify.
I think that it’s important for Congress to keep the CIA under observation, it’s important for the CIA to report regularly, but I think what Panetta said Friday is very telling. It is illegal to lie to Congress. And the CIA doesn’t do it, and Panetta said it is harming this institution. He made a speech Monday in which he said this is harming the institution. And I have no sense that — I mean, I would certainly, if I were a person trying to defend this country, I’d have very little confidence that the Speaker of the House had any regard for what we were doing and what we’re trying to do to stop terrorism.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well, Next is a liar and a hypocrite, so this comes as no surprise. He most likely still has sour grapes at how his own reign as Speaker of the House ended.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pm.
Shorter Gingrich:
.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pmNewt*, not Next
May 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pmIve seen people insert a foot into their mouth but I have never seen someone fit in two clown feet.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:12 pmHey Newt, STFU. I mean shush.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:14 pmGood work, Diane, Newt would never be asked that over at FOX where he normally malingers.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:17 pmCan someone please tell me why we have these HACKS on TV? He is not in office, he is not part of the official RNC. Why are there not more Dems on tv concidering the Dems have the most seats in the house and senate????
Is this what we are to presume, the more irrelivant the Republicans become, the more TV air time they should recieve??? Is this the way democrocy works???? Shouldn’t we be hearing from the party in POWER???? What they are preposing in new legislatio???? WHY DO WE KEEP HEARING THE OPPOSING VIEW BEFORE ANY FACTS OR LEGISLATION COMES OUT FOR REVIEW?????
I know the MSM has people monitoring the blogs, and I’m sure they think (or feel)they still control our thoughts. I have one thought for you MSM, WE ARE NOT STUPID AS YOU MIGHT THINK. WE SEE THROUGH THE LIES !!!!
May 20th, 2009 at 1:20 pmRep. Peter Hoekstra’s (D-MI)???
Isn’t he an R?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:20 pmHis introduction should always emphasize former speaker, forced out, disgraced, lier and hypocrite.
It’s always good when anyone points out the tired republican double standard. No, it’s not ok if you’re republican, hypocrites.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:22 pmbtw – jon stewart got some good ones in last night…
May 20th, 2009 at 1:22 pmvery subtle, but left newtie speechless at times…
to be honest, i was hoping for blood, but, oh well…
speechless is good too…
So according to Newt the Hypocritter Ms. Pelosi should relinquish her position SOLELY because she “disrespected” the CIA. The same CIA that spoonfed unsubstantiated and bad intel to Dick Cheney. The same CIA whose character was questioned by EVERY Repuke over their accurate assessment of Iran’s nuclear program. Where was this posturing pusbag Gingrich when Dick Cheney and his merrymen were outing a covert CIA operative for political reasons? Considering that just in the past couple of days we have seen several documented cases of Republicans claiming that the CIA lied to them, this story will die a quick painless death.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:22 pmNewt is a typical republican who cannot accept his irrelevancy. What position does this fat, steamy, pant load hold in government? Didn’t he get kicked out a few years ago for incompetency or something? Give me a break. Newt and republicans do not matter in the grand scheme of things. They are the minority and they are a dying breed.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:23 pmAs with most children, Newty hasn’t learned yet that you can’t have your cake and eat it too. I’m pretty sure that it’s safe to say that he will never learn.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:23 pmPLC,
May 20th, 2009 at 1:24 pmI see bad proof reading isn’t just reserved for FOXPRAVDA chirons.
thinkprogress reeeeeaaaaaccccchhhhhhiiiinnnngggg while ignoring what a disgrace Pelosi is.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:24 pmPelosi is a liberal woman from San Francisco whose very existence and the especially galling fact that she’s Speaker has these morons seeing red and abandoning any semblance of logic or hypocrisy.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:25 pm.
Funny, no one asks this man why he thinks America should be attacked…
… AGAIN.
.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:26 pmOh Diane, didn’t you hear? White Conservative men can do or say any gawddamned thing they want. It’s their world and their reality that we can only study and name aeroports after their gods.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:30 pmlooks like someone needs a list of newtie’s disgraces, vs. nancy’s…
May 20th, 2009 at 1:30 pmLet’s not keep framing this as a Nancy Pelosi problem. If the Bush Administration hadn’t given the go-ahead in the first place to start torturing people, this would never have happened.
Let’s keep our focus squarely where it belongs.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:32 pm.
Congress’s Torture Bubble
Written by Vicki Divoll, a former deputy counsel to the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, was the general counsel of the Senate Intelligence Committee from 2001 to 2003. She teaches government at the United States Naval Academy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/opinion/13divoll.html
To perpetuate the meme that the gang of four was legal in 2007 is perpostuous, at best, because the gang of four was illegal, from the start.
.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:33 pmraynman,
May 20th, 2009 at 1:35 pmTo be honest, had Bush/Cheney kept America safe on 09/10/01, this would be a non-issue.
raynman Says:
——————————————————————————–
Let’s not keep framing this as a Nancy Pelosi problem. If the Bush Administration hadn’t given the go-ahead in the first place to start torturing people, this would never have happened.
Let’s keep our focus squarely where it belongs.
If Pelosi knew about everything and did nothing when she objects to it I think it is a big deal. Bush feels that the tactics were justified, but Pelosi does not and her inactivity in the matter makes her complicit. Add that to the fact that she is calling the CIA liars, it is a big deal.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pmJohnM reeeeeaaaaaccccchhhhhhiiiinnnngggg while ignoring what a disgrace BushCo’s authorization of torture is.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pmGingrich struggled uncomfortably and repeatedly attempted to change the subject:
JohnM struggled uncomfortably and repeatedly attempted to change the subject:
May 20th, 2009 at 1:39 pmshoeless Says:
——————————————————————————–
Gingrich struggled uncomfortably and repeatedly attempted to change the subject:
JohnM struggled uncomfortably and repeatedly attempted to change the subject:
Actually that is what thinkprogress is doing here.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:41 pmDon’t you dare call a covert agency liars!
May 20th, 2009 at 1:41 pmBush feels that the tactics were justified
Justification is one of the primary thinking errors employed by criminals, see “Samenow thinking errors” for more information.
Justification is reeeeeaaaaaaccccchhhhhiiiinnnngggg.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:42 pmWhy is this clown getting so much airtime??? He was thrown out as speaker for being a giant a$$hat and now he is simply trying to project the same thing onto Democrats. The difference is that his spew is completely baseless!
May 20th, 2009 at 1:44 pmPatrioticLiberalChristianMantisReligiosa Says:
——————————————————————————–
Bush feels that the tactics were justified
Justification is one of the primary thinking errors employed by criminals, see “Samenow thinking errors” for more information.
Justification is reeeeeaaaaaaccccchhhhhiiiinnnngggg.
If somebody knows that something is wrong and does nothing about it that is wrong. Bush felt what he was doing was keeping America safe and Pelosi disagreed with him in public, but in private she held her tounge. You don’t see a problem with that?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:45 pmSubject: Officials in the Bush Administration illegally planned, ordered, implementated, and lied about American use of torture in order to advance its political agenda.
Distractions: no, Democrats such as Pelosi knew, it worked
Tools of Mass Distraction: FOX, Newt, Limbaugh, trolls
May 20th, 2009 at 1:46 pm“feels that the tactics were justified”
robbers feel that stealing is justified…
murderers feel that killing is justified…
etc…
and, if “the end justifies the means”, then ANYthing goes…
evidently…
May 20th, 2009 at 1:47 pmJohnM says, “I know you are but what am I?”
JohnM says, “I am rubber, you are glue.”
JohnM says, “Liberal says what?”
Of course, I’m paraphrasing, but that is the flavor of his comments. My 8-year-old nephew could do better.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:47 pmSounds like Newt is past due for a neurological exam, but it would probably take a proctologist to do it correctly.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:47 pmYes, they kidnap suspected terrorists and take them to black sites and torture them, and they have a sordid history of smuggling drugs and overthrowing governments, but don’t question their veracity when justifying themselves to Congressional Oversight!
May 20th, 2009 at 1:48 pmJohn, focus. Bush broke the law. Nancy Pelosi did not break the law.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:49 pmhyacinthgirl Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM says, “I know you are but what am I?”
JohnM says, “I am rubber, you are glue.”
JohnM says, “Liberal says what?”
Of course, I’m paraphrasing, but that is the flavor of his comments. My 8-year-old nephew could do better.
Glad to see you have taken the mature route.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:49 pmI’m with eyeswideopen1 and NOLIESPLEASE – why is Newt getting so much airtime?
As far as I’m concerned he lost ALL credibility once it came to light that he was calling for Clinton’s impeachment WHILE conducting an extra-marital affair.
Newt Gingrich has admitted to having an affair while cheerleading the assault on Bill Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Hypocrisy is nothing new to Newt, who extolled family values after serving divorce papers on his wife while she lay dying of cancer.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:50 pmJohnM Says:
Bush feels that the tactics were justified, but Pelosi does not and her inactivity in the matter makes her complicit.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
___________
Complicit in what? If there was no torture and/or the torture was justified, what’s the problem? Or are you willing to admit that torture was committed and torture is legally and morally unjustifiable?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:50 pm——————————————————————————–
shoeless Says:
——————————————————————————–
John, focus. Bush broke the law. Nancy Pelosi did not break the law.
She is an accomplice for doing nothing to stop it.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:50 pmJohnM is a sicko who believes we should classify suspected terrorists as non-human so we can beat the living tar out of them for his and other sadist’s pleasure.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pmJohnM Says:
thinkprogress reeeeeaaaaaccccchhhhhhiiiinnnngggg while ignoring what a disgrace Pelosi is.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
John BABBBBLLLLLLIIIIINNNNNGGGGGGGG while ignoring what a moron he is
May 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
Does Newt Gingrich think John McCain’s torture was justified?
After all, the North Vietnamese were defending their “HOMELAND”.
.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pmmary lacewing Says:
I’m with eyeswideopen1 and NOLIESPLEASE – why is Newt getting so much airtime?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:50
_________
Cause he’s pimping a new book. That’s why he was on The Daily Show.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:51 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
Bush feels that the tactics were justified, but Pelosi does not and her inactivity in the matter makes her complicit.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
___________
Complicit in what? If there was no torture and/or the torture was justified, what’s the problem? Or are you willing to admit that torture was committed and torture is legally and morally unjustifiable?
If she feels that waterboarding is torture and did nothing to stop it then she is complicit by allowing it to continue.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pmOf course you do.
You’re a partisan idiot.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pmSee John, this is the problem. You and the rest of the criminal enterprise known as the Republican party no longer care about law. You think you can ignore the law based on how you feel at any particular moment. That is not how this country operates, and that is why your party is now irrelevant, and on it’s way to oblivion. Bye, bye.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pmJohnM–
Hey, I call ‘em like I see ‘em. Your comments are laughable. Repub talking points. And you just don’t get it. You can’t say that a murderer should go free but that a person who was told about the murder after the fact should be punished. That’s what you’re saying, and it’s patently absurd. My eight-year-old nephew, as well as my Welsh Corgi, could figure that out. I’m not being insulting; I’m stating facts.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pmUh-oh, I mentioned Clinton’s name while in the proximity of a right-winger. Let’s see if JohnM will be able to stop himself from the Pavlov’s dog response.
Or have all the right-wingers been reprogrammed to auto-react upon the mention of Pelosi now?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:54 pmJohnM Says: If somebody knows that something is wrong and does nothing about it that is wrong. Bush felt what he was doing was keeping America safe and Pelosi disagreed with him in public, but in private she held her tounge. You don’t see a problem with that?
I see much wrong.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:55 pmBushCo did not respect the Constitution and laws of the US which they gave an oath to protect.
BushCo did not respect the moral imperative to avoid harming people to advance a political agenda while claiming the Christian mantle at the same time.
Our “national security” parameters which constrain whistleblowers, which Pelosi could and should have been, are excessive.
You are a torture apologist.
John, do you realize you just agreed with me that Bush broke the law?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:55 pmJohnM Says:
The briefings were classified what she COULD do is limited. The ranking Dem of the comittee made a complaint through the proper channels. That was what needed to be done. This is a red herring. The Bush administration can think all day that they are JUSTIFIED to break the law that doesnt make it legal. Even IF what Pelosi did was wrong, and if that is shown fine, hold her accountable it PALES in comparison to making us a nation that tortures people.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:55 pmHow did she “allow” it to continue?
What power did she have to overrule administration policy, as a minority member of Congress?
You have to make a choice here, JohnM: either the administration tortured detainees, in which case Speaker Pelosi’s silence makes her at worst a minor accessory and Bush administration officials are culpable for serious war crimes,
OR
as you insist, no crime was committed and therefore the Speaker’s silence carries no legal consequences whatsoever.
Which is it?
May 20th, 2009 at 1:56 pmDr. Hussein Matt Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
If she feels that waterboarding is torture and did nothing to stop it then she is complicit by allowing it to continue.
You reich-wingers claim she is “an accomplice” and “complicit”. Please explain what she is “an accomplice” and “complicit” to precisely.
We’ll wait….
I’m actually being very clear. She feels that waterboarding is a crime, and since she did nothing to stop it in her eyes she would have to be a criminal as well.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:57 pmTo be fair, hyacinthgirl, Welsh Corgis can display pretty good intelligence.
Certainly better than JohnM displays.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:58 pmJohnM Says:
If somebody knows that something is wrong and does nothing about it that is wrong. Bush felt what he was doing was keeping America safe and Pelosi disagreed with him in public, but in private she held her tounge. You don’t see a problem with that?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You dont KNOW what she said at that meeting since you werent THERE you are also not a member of Congress and dont know what the protocol is IN such briefings. You are spinning desperately and assuming facts NOT in evidence and keep ignoring the FACT these briefings were CLASSIFIED.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:58 pmJohnM Says:
If she feels that waterboarding is torture and did nothing to stop it then she is complicit by allowing it to continue.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
____________
Thank you for conceding that waterboarding is torture. Now do please explain what a minority member of the House could possibly have done to stop it, short of breaking the law by releasing classified information.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:58 pmJohnM Says:
She is an accomplice for doing nothing to stop it.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You are an idiot for assuming as fact things you cannot POSSIBLY KNOW.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:59 pmhyacinthgirl Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM–
Hey, I call ‘em like I see ‘em. Your comments are laughable. Repub talking points. And you just don’t get it. You can’t say that a murderer should go free but that a person who was told about the murder after the fact should be punished. That’s what you’re saying, and it’s patently absurd. My eight-year-old nephew, as well as my Welsh Corgi, could figure that out. I’m not being insulting; I’m stating facts.
I love you do this without discussing any points I made. You clearly are not able to understand the conversation. I think it is pretty clear here how partisan people that visit this site are. They are willing to jump all over anybody that has an (r) next to their name but give miles of leeway to “their own”. Doesn’t seem very progressive to me, but I certainly am not surprised.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:59 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
If she feels that waterboarding is torture and did nothing to stop it then she is complicit by allowing it to continue.
May 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
____________
Thank you for conceding that waterboarding is torture. Now do please explain what a minority member of the House could possibly have done to stop it, short of breaking the law by releasing classified information.
When did I concede that? Please learn to read and comprehend next time.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pmEven IF she was told that they were already waterboarding (still an IF at this point) what could she have done? As I mentioned yesterday, I’ve heard that she could have tussled with the Bush administration in the background.
But, as Karen Hughes admitted, she advised them that the waterboarding would make the country look bad. So if they won’t even listen to their own people why would they suddenly stop thumbing their noses at the other party?
Since JohnM seems to be tone deaf this is obviously a rhetorical question.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pmWhether Speaker Pelosi “feels that waterboarding is a crime” has no bearing on the actual criminality of the act.
If it is a crime, then those who ordered and executed the policy are far more culpable than anyone who was simply briefed on it and said nothing.
If it isn’t a crime (as you insist) then there is no culpablity to be distributed.
You have to make up your mind.
Well… I guess you don’t have to, but then you’d just confirm what everyone here suspects of you — that you’re either not serious, or incapable of logical thought.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pmEugeneDebs Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
If somebody knows that something is wrong and does nothing about it that is wrong. Bush felt what he was doing was keeping America safe and Pelosi disagreed with him in public, but in private she held her tounge. You don’t see a problem with that?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You dont KNOW what she said at that meeting since you werent THERE you are also not a member of Congress and dont know what the protocol is IN such briefings. You are spinning desperately and assuming facts NOT in evidence and keep ignoring the FACT these briefings were CLASSIFIED.
You can make excuses all you want for her, it just shows how partisan you really are.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm.
Dear JohnM,
Is it the TORTURE or is it the zipped lips?
.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pmok – NObody’s getting any smarter here…
May 20th, 2009 at 2:03 pmOkay, JohnM, let’s get down to brass tacks:
in your opinion, is waterboarding torture?
May 20th, 2009 at 2:04 pmMy thoughts on whether or not it is a crime is not relevant, but Pelosi’s thoughts are. She clearly thinks it is a crime, yet did nothing to stop it. That is obvious hypocricy and anybody that states different is not looking at this objectively.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:06 pmJohnM Says:
I love you do this without discussing any points I made. You clearly are not able to understand the conversation. I think it is pretty clear here how partisan people that visit this site are. They are willing to jump all over anybody that has an (r) next to their name but give miles of leeway to “their own”. Doesn’t seem very progressive to me, but I certainly am not surprised.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Why should Hyacinth girl bother. Your weak attempt at point have been DESTROYED. YOU are a brainwashed partisan yourself totally and completely immune to facts. Trust me I dont care in the LEAST what a rightwingnut like you thinks about how partisan we are.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:06 pmActually, John had a lucid moment when he admitted that Bush committed a crime. But, then he lapsed back into Republican talking points hell.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:06 pmJohnM Says:
You can make excuses all you want for her, it just shows how partisan you really are.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
EXCUSE????? You are claiming as fact things you cannot possibly know. That isnt an excuse it is showing you are pulling your argument directly out of your ASS without the slightest support for them. Calling that an excuse just shows how STUPID you are.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:07 pmI agree that you are irrelevant. However, it was still nice to see you admit that Bush is a criminal.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:07 pm.
Dear John,
If Pelosi is, as you say, guilty of being an accomplice to a crime, then what is that crime you say she is guilty of? Secrecy? TORTURE?
If you first claim, that Pelosi is guilty of being an accomplice to a crime, is to be correct, then it is implicit that you acknowledge the crime she is guilty of being an accomplice to… NO?
And if you should bring yourself to this precipice, then I suggest you take a good look around and see that Pelosi is not the sole guilty party here. If, at best, she was informed in 2002, it was AFTER THE FACT of any TORTURE.
And TORTURE is the root crime for which you say she was an accomplice to.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:07 pmJohnM Says:
When did I concede that? Please learn to read and comprehend next time.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
_______________
Let’s see… Here:
And here:
And here:
Do you now deny saying any of those things? The record is pretty clear.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:08 pmJohnM believes that any action, however heinous, is justifiable against a terror suspect unless it is specifically mentioned in a treaty that specifically describes the said suspected terrorist. Otherwise all bets are off and his sadism is on!
May 20th, 2009 at 2:09 pm.
Dear JohnM,
What is Pelosi guilty of exactly?
.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:09 pm——————————————————————————–
Max Anax junius -1 Says:
——————————————————————————–
.
Dear John,
If Pelosi is, as you say, guilty of being an accomplice to a crime, then what is that crime you say she is guilty of? Secrecy? TORTURE?
If you first claim, that Pelosi is guilty of being an accomplice to a crime, is to be correct, then it is implicit that you acknowledge the crime she is guilty of being an accomplice to… NO?
And if you should bring yourself to this precipice, then I suggest you take a good look around and see that Pelosi is not the sole guilty party here. If, at best, she was informed in 2002, it was AFTER THE FACT of any TORTURE.
And TORTURE is the root crime for which you say she was an accomplice to.
I don’t know how much easier I can explain this??? My thoughts on whether or not it is a crime does not matter. Her thoughts are that it is a crime and she did nothing to stop it so that would make her an accomplice in her minds and should in all of yours.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:10 pmJohnM Says:
My thoughts on whether or not it is a crime is not relevant, but Pelosi’s thoughts are. She clearly thinks it is a crime, yet did nothing to stop it. That is obvious hypocricy and anybody that states different is not looking at this objectively.
So you want to, what, fire Pelosi for hypocrisy? How about Newt’s hypocrisy (which is the topic of the thread)? How do you feel about that?
If we’re going to demand resignations of any politician guilty of hypocrisy, we’re going to end up with a lot of empty offices.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:11 pmOf course your thoughts are relevant. You’re accusing Speaker Pelosi of being complicit in a crime.
If your thoughts just as relevant as Speaker Pelosi’s, since your claim is that she is complicit based on her belief of the law, rather than on the law itself.
Therefore, your belief of the law is every bit as relevant, since if you accuse the Speaker of complicity in a crime, yet you believe no crime exists, you are being just as hypocritical as you claim the Speaker is being.
YOU clearly think it is NOT a crime. To accuse the Speaker of “complicity” in something that is not a crime is obvious hypocrisy and anybody that states differently is not looking at your comments objectively.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:11 pmControlled torture is just fiiiiiiiiiiine for Johnny. Slow it down, right mate–savor it!
May 20th, 2009 at 2:12 pmJohnM Says:
My thoughts on whether or not it is a crime is not relevant, but Pelosi’s thoughts are. She clearly thinks it is a crime, yet did nothing to stop it. That is obvious hypocricy and anybody that states different is not looking at this objectively.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You cannot possibly KNOW what she did or didnt do since the whole thing is CLASSIFIED. She might have thrown FITS behind closed doors you dont KNOW. You also dont KNOW whether it is protocol to just listen at those meetings or to argue. YOU DONT KNOW. And yet you keep claiming she did nothing. There may be a clearly defined way TO protest such as having the ranking member of the comittee formally protest WHICH WAS DONE. What part of YOU. DONT. KNOW are you too stupid to understand? Anyone who thinks differently is a MORON. John you really arent very good at this you do know that dont you? Making assumptions, pulling arguments directly out of your ass with NO evidenciary backup is weak. REPEATING your weak baseless assertions a dozen times borders on LUNACY.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:12 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
When did I concede that? Please learn to read and comprehend next time.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
_______________
Let’s see… Here:
JohnM Says:
…waterboarding is torture…
May 20th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
And here:
JohnM Says:
…waterboarding is a crime…
May 20th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
And here:
JohnM Says:
…waterboarding is torture … I concede that…
May 20th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Do you now deny saying any of those things? The record is pretty clear.
Are you really going to stand by that without putting the rest of the sentences in? A very sad attempt there.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:13 pmJohnM is a robot programmed by Frank Lutz.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:14 pmOkay. This is Newt Gingrich we are talking about. Remember, this is the guy that was so outraged that Bill Clinton was having an affair…….while at the same time this hypocrit was doing the same thing. Why does anyone give him a platform? Why does anyone care what he has to say?
May 20th, 2009 at 2:14 pmYou know the GOP pays bloggers to blog on progressive sites and for people to call to progressive radio shows with GOP talking points. And they are so obvious.
The corporate media is putting these GOP talking heads on every network, radio, blogs, and twitter.
How dare the former selfish Cheney keep talking. Because he and his crew, along with his selfish party, are scared sh**tless, thats why.
Pelosi right now is the dumping ground. But she’s strong as heck. So they keep pumping, which breaths more fire to a subject which I suspect the GOP could want to keep quiet.
Now it seems like the moderate GOP are beginning to speak up and challenging the conservatives/right wing religious crazies.
Fight among themselves. Who will win, and this point the Limpballs.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:14 pm——————————————————————————–
EugeneDebs Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
My thoughts on whether or not it is a crime is not relevant, but Pelosi’s thoughts are. She clearly thinks it is a crime, yet did nothing to stop it. That is obvious hypocricy and anybody that states different is not looking at this objectively.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You cannot possibly KNOW what she did or didnt do since the whole thing is CLASSIFIED. She might have thrown FITS behind closed doors you dont KNOW. You also dont KNOW whether it is protocol to just listen at those meetings or to argue. YOU DONT KNOW. And yet you keep claiming she did nothing. There may be a clearly defined way TO protest such as having the ranking member of the comittee formally protest WHICH WAS DONE. What part of YOU. DONT. KNOW are you too stupid to understand? Anyone who thinks differently is a MORON. John you really arent very good at this you do know that dont you? Making assumptions, pulling arguments directly out of your ass with NO evidenciary backup is weak. REPEATING your weak baseless assertions a dozen times borders on LUNACY.
So she could have thrown fits about it, but says she was never told and calls the CIA liars. You really will not stop at any lengths to protect a democrat.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:14 pmJohnM Says:
… it is a crime and she did nothing to stop it so that would make her an accomplice in her minds and should in all of yours.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
_____________
So now that you’ve also conceded that (a) waterboarding is a crime and (b) Nancy Pelosi has multiple minds, please answer my prior question. Assuming the CIA accurately briefed her as to the fact that they were going to be torturing detainees, what should minority House member Nancy Pelosi have done with the classified information she received about torture in order to stop it?
May 20th, 2009 at 2:16 pmHope Says:
——————————————————————————–
You know the GOP pays bloggers to blog on progressive sites and for people to call to progressive radio shows with GOP talking points. And they are so obvious.
Why would the GOP pay bloggers to blog on progessive sites? Everybody knows that truth is not something that will change the mind of so called progressives. They will just keep following the marching orders of sites like this that are loose with the facts in order to push their agenda. Sad really, but it is fun to mess with them and point out how pathetically partisan they really are.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:17 pmDoesn’t this scumbag have a wife to cheat on or something?
Fcuk the Republic Fascist Party
May 20th, 2009 at 2:17 pmJohnM Says:
Are you really going to stand by that without putting the rest of the sentences in? A very sad attempt there.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
_____________
Do you deny putting those words in that order? You can backpedal all you want, but the record speaks for itself. You have said on no fewer than three occasions that waterboarding is torture and waterboarding is a crime.
To deny that you made these statements is to commit the very same hypocrisy that you now accuse Nancy Pelosi of. You should be ashamed of yourself.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:17 pm“She could have thrown fits about it”???
Seriously?
How much good do you think it did for Republicans to “throw fits about” the President’s stimulus bill? Did they stop it?
You’re really not fit for a debate like this, JohnM. You seem to think that arguments that are emotionally persuasive with you should be logically persuasive to others, and they’re just not.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pmUh, right here:
May 20th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
chiroptera toasterhead Says:
——————————————————————————–
JohnM Says:
… it is a crime and she did nothing to stop it so that would make her an accomplice in her minds and should in all of yours.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
_____________
So now that you’ve also conceded that (a) waterboarding is a crime and (b) Nancy Pelosi has multiple minds, please answer my prior question. Assuming the CIA accurately briefed her as to the fact that they were going to be torturing detainees, what should minority House member Nancy Pelosi have done with the classified information she received about torture in order to stop it?
It really is sad that you have to take parts of a sentence and completely change what was said to try and win an argument.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:19 pmFor anyone on this comment site mentioning it, try to remember that at most Nacy Pelosi was complicit in a crime (if you believe what the past administration did was a crime) that was committed by others, namely Dick Cheney and G.W. Maybe she was stupid not to say anything, maybe because of the emotional climate of the country at the time she didn’t have the coiurage to say anything, or whatever. I don’t think she was right in doing nothing if she believed a crime was being committed, but she didn’t commit the crime. Focusing on her is just a clever republican ploy to shift the focus away from them. The media and the american people are the dumb ones for letting the focus be shifted.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:20 pmRight. Just like the truth is not something that’s going to change the mind of anyone who already has a firm grasp of the truth.
The sad thing is that the truth is not something that will ever change the mind of a right-winger, as long as they’ve got their cherished right-wing myths to cling to.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:20 pmshoeless Says:
——————————————————————————–
John, focus. Bush broke the law. Nancy Pelosi did not break the law.
She is an accomplice for doing nothing to stop it.
John, do you realize you just agreed with me that Bush broke the law?
Keep trying to change what I am saying instead of actually discussing what was said.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pmJohn, look at #96. It is your complete sentence. You agreed with me that Bush broke the law.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pmJohnM says:
I don’t know how much easier I can explain this??? My thoughts on whether or not it is a crime does not matter. Her thoughts are that it is a crime and she did nothing to stop it so that would make her an accomplice in her minds and should in all of yours.
But no word from you on Bush, Cheney, Rice, Tenent, wolfowitz, rumsfeld, feith, etc…
Your position is as clear as you can be. You want the innocent bystanders to pay a price (Pelosi), just not the actual people who planned, devised, ordered, and carried out the torture. That is the root – and rot – of your modern GOP.
Oh look, a shiny distraction from the real issue****
Folks this troll is untrainable – no chance for understanding. He thinks EIT is not a crime, but he wants Pelosi to pay a price for not speaking out about the not-crime. He’s a loon.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:21 pmJohnM Says:
It really is sad that you have to take parts of a sentence and completely change what was said to try and win an argument.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
____________
And it really is sad that your only tactic is to use semantic gobbledygook to deny the extremely verifiable fact that you said what you said.
Actually, that’s not your only tactic. You also ignore direct questions, such as the one I’ve asked you twice already.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:23 pmJohn stop lying. Look at post #42, which is the original post where you agreed with me that Bush committed a crime. I changed nothing of what you said.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:24 pmJohnM, what you are basically saying is that Nancy Pelosi was complicit in a crime in her own mind for not “throwing a fit about it”.
If there was no crime, there was no complicity.
You claim there was no crime committed by the Bush administration in authorizing torture (or, at least, you imply that — you’re not man enough to actually own up to it).
Yet you continue to insist that Nancy Pelosi was complicit.
You make no sense, JohnM.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:24 pmJohnM Says:
So she could have thrown fits about it, but says she was never told and calls the CIA liars. You really will not stop at any lengths to protect a democrat.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My GOD are you really this stupid? She says she wasnt told they were DOING waterboarding she doesnt claim she wasnt told it was being discussed as an option. She COULD have thrown a fit about that and the CIA ARE liars. That is a well known FACT. Remember Jim Webb his article came out talking about the CIA contra drug connection and the ruined his career. They then a year later did an internal investigation which showed while he got some details wrong the basic thrust of his story was TRUE. They lied to congress for YEARS about the strength of the Soviet military then ADMITTED DOING SO for political reasons. Some of the Congressmen have SHOWN that they are claiming they were briefed at times THEY WERENT IN DC. The last is probably a mistake but so could their assessment of what they told Pelosi. You are ignorant John. I am not even a Democrat and have been all over Dems when they screw up. I dont care if Pelosi who isnt one of my favorites trust me goes down like the Titanic. That doesnt change the FACT that your arguments are IDIOTIC
May 20th, 2009 at 2:25 pmJohnM 92
What everyone KNOWS John is that you are a brainwashed moron
May 20th, 2009 at 2:25 pmNo wonder this stupid old man lost the election….John M thinks that pelosi is an accomplice to a crime that wasn’t committed, or more precisely, John M thinks that in order for something to be a crime the person committing it has to agree it’s a crime, if that person says it’s not a crime, then it’s not. And, if someone else thinks it is a crime but doesn’t say anything about it, then that person HAS committed a crime, even if by speaking out that person would have, in fact, committed a crime.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pmWe can’t discuss what you said, because you are denying that you said it. Look at your post #42. You agreed that Bush broke the law.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:28 pmJohnMoron is a great example of how corrupt, unethical and immoral the ReichWingers have become.
The hive-mind of the Republic Fascist Party tells him what to think and he freely does.
Don’t let facts interrupt you talking points fella.
NO ONE KNOWS WHAT WENT ON IN THAT MEETING, PERIOD, NO ONE.
And it is not like the CIA has not made up stuff before, it’s what they do.
And by the way you are stupid, but you know that already.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:29 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
JohnM Says:
It really is sad that you have to take parts of a sentence and completely change what was said to try and win an argument.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
____________
And it really is sad that your only tactic is to use semantic gobbledygook to deny the extremely verifiable fact that you said what you said.
Toasterhead, he’s a republican, what do you expect? He’s arguing that pelosi is complicit in a crime that wasn’t committed because she knows waterboarding is a crime but republicans are choosing to say it’s not, until the CIA does it again under Obama’s watch, then step back and watch the fireworks as they clammer for Obama’s impeachment for breaking the Geneva Conventions, while still claiming that it wasn’t illegal when bush did it but pelosi should step down because she dint’ say anything about the crime that wasn’t committed…
May 20th, 2009 at 2:33 pmOf course John M will deny that he said something on post 42 of this thread. by his usual standards, this is straight forward logic…
May 20th, 2009 at 2:35 pmshoeless Says:
——————————————————————————–
John, look at #96. It is your complete sentence. You agreed with me that Bush broke the law.
Wow! You really are a moron, we both know that is not what was said or meant by it. Clearly it is based on the fact that YOU SAID Bush committed a crime, then my post is to show that if you believe he did then you must also believe that Pelosi is an accomplice. Maybe the poster that said her nephew would do a better job was right because he is at the same level as most posters here.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:35 pmAh, the old axiom:
If a crime is committed in government,
May 20th, 2009 at 2:37 pmand there isn’t a Democrat to hear it,
is it really a crime?
John, look at post #42. You wrote that, not me. You agreed that Bush committed a crime. You are arguing with yourself here, not me.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:39 pmI see JohnM is deliberately avoiding all of us who have pointed out that if there is no crime (as he believes) then there is no complicity in a crime.
Yet JohnM tries to keep his little dandelion of an argument alive by sticking it in a Dixie cup full of water: namely, his refusal to admit that he doesn’t believe waterboarding is torture. Because the minute he takes that obvious stand, his hypocrisy is put in bold relief.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:39 pmBecause the minute he takes that obvious stand, his hypocrisy is put in bold relief.
I really don’t see anything constructive coming from debating torture apologists. Their frightened worldview precludes any hope of reasoning with them.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:43 pmPoor, dispassionate, soul-less Johnny, has to be convinced first that suspected terrorists are human beings before he will cede that any harm done to their person is illegal.
May 20th, 2009 at 2:45 pmJohn M does not have an inkling of what the legal standard is for secondary liability. If he did, he would not be so confident that Pelosi was an “accomplice” or “complicit.” Obviously, this must be the Faux talking points because he is the second knuckledragger I have encountered who has made this BS claim. When you are informed about the law of secondary liability, then come back to engage in an informed discussiopn, Kay!
May 20th, 2009 at 2:54 pmJohnM says: I’m actually being very clear. She feels that waterboarding is a crime, and since she did nothing to stop it in her eyes she would have to be a criminal as well.
By this logic, if she feels that the CIA lied to her then she should call them on it. If she did not feel that she had the authority to confront them as minority leader, then she was not wrong. If BushCo can feel that waterboarding is right and act on that, then why couldn’t they think that assassinating political opponents was right and act on that?
May 20th, 2009 at 3:21 pmIf Newt felt that his sexual indiscretions were not wrong, why didn’t he accept that Clinton felt his sexual indiscretions were also not wrong?
JohnM Says:
If Pelosi knew about everything and did nothing when she objects to it I think it is a big deal. Bush feels that the tactics were justified, but Pelosi does not and her inactivity in the matter makes her complicit. Add that to the fact that she is calling the CIA liars, it is a big deal.
So torture is not a big deal except to punish Democrats and blame them? Torture is owned by the Republicans…face it…They are the ones who get all hot and steamy when it comes to torture…
May 20th, 2009 at 3:32 pmJohnMaggot says:
This is hilarious coming from somebody who refuses to admit that what Bush and Cheney did was torture and IT IS ILLEGAL.
You people are traitors to this country and have absolutely no shame for the destruction you have imposed on us all. If you had an ounce of human decency you’d apologize and slink back to your cave. I said IF.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:34 pmNewtie is now and has always been a disingenuous opportunist. He has no credibility. It’s great to see him squirm… Well, it really isn’t great to actually see the slug do anything… he’s pretty hard to look at. Listening to his whiney voice isn’t much fun either.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:34 pmThe Repukes have been looking for things to hang on Pelosi since inauguration day. The first thing they nailed her with was having her own plane. Even though Bush had initiated the plane for the speaker for Hastert because the Speaker is third in line and the “terrorist”. I never heard one Rethug complain until Bush was gone and then Fox started whining about it. It’s easy to push these memes because the people who listen to Fox and Rush are all as dumb and MaggotJohn and can’t remember what they heard 3 months ago.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:38 pmJohnM Says:
I love you do this without discussing any points I made. You clearly are not able to understand the conversation. I think it is pretty clear here how partisan people that visit this site are. They are willing to jump all over anybody that has an (r) next to their name but give miles of leeway to “their own”. Doesn’t seem very progressive to me, but I certainly am not surprised.
John, on the contrary, I DID address your issue PRECISELY. And I understand the conversation perfectly. DO YOU? You clearly aren’t listening. So get the crap out of your ears and read my lips while I respond to your point. The general train of thought here–if you’re paying attention–is that if Pelosi did something wrong, she should go down. However, there also is general agreement that anything she might have done is minor compared to the crimes committed by Cheney and company (i.e., approving/ordering torture to get a link between Saddam and 9/11) and that we need to focus on the big issue (i.e., Cheney and co. war crimes) and not be distracted by a minor–and as yet unproven–crime committed by Pelosi.
GOT IT, friend??? Or do I need to draw you a picture?
May 20th, 2009 at 3:41 pm#125 assuming she did commit a crime, even if she knew full and well that the admin. was waterboarding. To be an accomplice or an aider and abetter, one has to, among other things, provide SUBSTANTIAL assistance to the commission of the crime. That is how the driver of the get-away car gets nailed for bank robbery. Mere knowledge would not seem to rise to SUBSTANTIAL assistance.
Furthermore, I do not know how should could be an accessory to the crime through knowledge (assuming she was informed) beause this information was conveyed to her under the cover of national security. This is an extraordinary circumstance that few would ever face. Who is she going to tell? The NY Times? It’s a crime to leak classified information. It’s not like she could even go to her lawyer and seek advice on what to do. That’s why this meme by the rabid right (who have tried mightily to demonize Pelosi to no success) is so extraordinarily stupid, and it has nothing to do with partisanship or blindly protecting Nancy Pelosi. There just is no legal basis for their claims.
At most, any knowledge imputed to her is ONLY a political issue and problem for the Democrats who may want to call hearings. IMHO, it would be very difficult to find her criminally liable for war crimes under the current set of facts as we know them. So, the knuckldraggers like Newt “I’m a Nasty, Ugly and Fat Hypocrite” Gingrich should STFU until all the fact are known. God I hated that man in the 90’s and I still hat him.
May 20th, 2009 at 3:58 pmShe must have hit a nerve. Hope she won’t let this get in the way of rallying people to get to the bottom of the torture issue.
May 20th, 2009 at 4:17 pmhyacinthgirl Says:
They just want it both ways…they want to claim that torture is bad so that they can make the Democrats take the fall, but then turn around and claim that it is the best tactic America has in the War on Terror to avoid any prosecution for it.
May 20th, 2009 at 4:26 pmUCSBKitty Says:
They just want it both ways…they want to claim that torture is bad so that they can make the Democrats take the fall, but then turn around and claim that it is the best tactic America has in the War on Terror to avoid any prosecution for it.
I’m getting tired of them wanting everything both ways.
If she had breached confidentiality and started yelling about it the right would have attacked her as putting the troops at risk, etc., etc. and probably started yelling to prosecute her for treason.
May 20th, 2009 at 4:35 pm129, indeed…I’ve come to the conclusion that they set up a trap for her to take the fall…
May 20th, 2009 at 4:47 pmAah, business as usual with our illustrious Republicans. Could they be more incredulous or outrageous? What if they had an epiphany and suddenly felt true integrity was relevant. Wait, where’s the fun in that? Ironic how their belligerent arrogance drives their demise. We need more swollen egos and flimsy logic from them to accelerate this delicious process. I love the smell of fetid minds burning in the morning.
May 20th, 2009 at 5:16 pmWhen progressives are progressive it’s “partisan”. When conservatives are conservative it’s ideological purity.
May 20th, 2009 at 5:41 pmWhat a disgrace and no shame piece of crap he is. Why is it when he is on a show bring it up he was a discraced speaker.
May 20th, 2009 at 5:57 pmyep, Newt is right. Only a republican can accuse the CIA of lying.
Republican Larry Craig can only tap his foot for airport restroom delight.
Only Newt could have an affair with a staffer while married as he spearheads Clinton’s sexcapade.
Only Mark Foley could be coveting gay sex with House pages and simply go to alcohol treatment and not pediphile prison.
Only Conservative Vice President DICK Cheney could shoot his best long time friend in the face with a shot gun and have his face shot friend appologize to Cheney.
May 21st, 2009 at 2:57 am