Someone that seems to be put on the sidelines is Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. His false info did helped build the imaginary link between Saddam and bin Ladin that allowed Bush to build a case that Iraq had something to do with 9/11

the saddam/Bin-Laddin link.

N/T

Many Diaries exist see here covering all that including the UN agreement the US is part of. So, if you want it to be known as Torture your lefty loons in Congress could so make it so by passing a new Law stating that it would now be considered Torture…. They have NOT attempted to do so since they took power in 2006…. Nor will they now…… They know it is a LOSER and they will NOT give up the EIT’s under a Democrat despite their BS rhetoric about it. You waste time and space with that easily refuted crap and we are NOT going to waste our time when we’ve covered it countless times already (see the link).

Well JLenard gave you the link…and you haven’t come back yet….I am guessing you probably will be back tomorrow with some horrendous link *proving* that the U.S. engages in torture.

I got two bucks on Japanese water cure.

My friend Dave and would be happy to educate you on that account. And after we’re done, Dave will demonstrate why waterboarding is not torture using a high speed dental drill, a dental pick and a can of freon.

We’ll be happy to meet any evening at your convenience.

If I really need to know what you know, you had better tell me.

This was covered on FNC’s “Special Report” today. The gist of it is that CIA was already demoralized when Slobama went over there and gave his little speech and promptly released those memos.

If Panetta failed to hit back on this second Nan thing, he would have lost the confidence of everyone at Langley, and would have been out the door.

As an aside - it is now clear that Obama has lined up on the side of wanting San Fran Nan *GONE*. Don’t think for a minute that Panetta didn’t check with Slobama before firing off this response to Nan.

With Obama wanting her gone, expect the CIA to release the notes of those meetings by next week, and expect Nan to “lose” the confidence of the Dem members of the House the week after.

I now think Pelosi will be out as Speaker (and she may even possibly resign the House) by the end of May/beginning of June.

I’ve seen this show before, and it always ends the same way.

(And, FTR, I’m the camp that would rather have Nan stick around, as I think it’s better for GOP prospects. Still, the Dems ran against both Gingrich and Delay after they left the House - so I guess the GOP can still run against Pelosi in 2010 even if she’s gone by then!)

Why not?

Panetta may just be motivated by a desire to do the right thing for his agency or for his country, or it may be more than that.

Obama has nullified the Clintons by putting Hillary in a position that he can completely control, which in turn puts Bill in a position where he’s unlikely to be critical of Obama (which would be unlikely in any case). But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t Clinton loyalists in the administration, ready and willing to undermine Obama and his supporters whenever possible.

Suppose that Leon Panetta is one of them. What better opportunity is he going to get to make Nan look bad and Obama look amateurish at the same time? She is providing all the ammunition; all he has to do is turn it back on her. And that’s exactly what he’s doing.

Don’t believe for a minute that she isn’t aware that she’s stepped in it, either. Notice that her latest on the subject amounts to “I wasn’t actually saying that the CIA had misled me. They were fine. It was the nasty Bush Administration led by the evil Dick Cheney who lied to me, not the CIA. Cheney did it! Bush did it! Their lawyers did it! Off with their heads!!!!” (Sentence first, no trial necessary or desirable)

She’s backing way off of any criticism of the CIA and trying to aim her weapons at Bush. And if you listen to NPR at all, you would think that she was perfectly logical in her statement, because they never put them all together.

If she successfully gets the attention diverted from her former claim of CIA “misleading information” and “lies,” her friends in the media will have her back (and Obama’s). But if Panetta presses the fight and more leaks (or outright press releases) come out, it might not be too much to guess that there is a Clintonian plot in play in the Maclean or even Foggy Bottom.

Something is missing in all of this: George Tenet was appointed CIA Director in July 1997 by Bill Clinton, and was the most prominent Democrat kept on by the GW Bush administration until July 2004.

Leon Panetta was Clinton’s Chief of Staff from 1994 to 1997; Obama appointed him CIA Director.

All the waterboarding took place under Tenet’s leadership … allegedly supervised by the House Oversight Committee of which Pelosi was ranking Democrat.

It is obvious that Congressional oversight committees are better at overlooking than overseeing … just look at the Banking Committees.

But Pelosi was RESPONSIBLE for oversight. ANY claims that she was “mislead” or “didn’t know about” are COMPLETELY facetious … If true, she did not do her job … if false, she’s a liar.

Steny Hoyer narrowly lost to Pelosi in his bid for Speaker following the Democratic take-over in ‘06.

He doesn’t share Pelosi’s incompetence.

But then, you thought I was right first :-).

The left is trying to make hay out of the idea that people were waterboarded to get them to confess that there were WMD in Iraq and that Al Qaeda and Saddam were in league.

The trouble with that line of thinking is that such a confession would be useless unless it came with proof. What could the Bush Admin have done, if hypothetically, they had used torture (or even waterboarding) to extract a confession like that? Trumpet it to the media? Yeah, right.

No. If they used EIT to get at WMD info or an Iraq-AQ link, it was to find those threats, in order to neutralize them, not to score political points.

Loren

It’s more likely to pass with Hoyer in charge than that idiot Pelosi.

This has presented Obama with the perfect opportunity to consolidate power. Use Paneta to cripple Pelosi. The House gets a bit less shrill. The nationalization/socialization of … well … everything … can move on quietly.

Pelosi’s Marxism is just to loud, obnoxious and shrill for Obama to move his Stalinist agenda. Pelosi just draws too much attention.

Just Chicago cult of personality Stalinism v. Bay Area utopianist Marxism.

the Obama camp wanted Pelosi out from the start, or, Pelosi fumbled and the Obama team wanted to distance itself quickly from this circus, this latest Panetta statement sure looks to me like the

If that’s the case, conservatives might as well make score a couple of lightning body blows this week on the lame duck Pelosi, but realize that this Republican-favoring political background music is soon going to pass.

Another high-profile Democrat shamed—Check
The lefty torture narrative weakened—Check
Early round to the Republicans—Check

Back to the corners

Unless the TOTUS is in cohoots with the TOTH, I don’t see how Obama could have directed the series of events. Perhaps the Obama team could have set the bait, but even if that was the case, it was up to Pelosi to fall for it.

In any event, once Pelosi asserted that the CIA misled her, the game had changed. Whether Obama is viewing this as damage management, damage management first with a residual opportunity, or an outright net opportunity, it sure looks like he’s throwing Pelosi under the bus.

And Hoyer is the next in line if Pelosi resigns or loses the speaker position. If he’s saying the same thing he’s going to pay for it too.

This could be a pretty good spectator sport.

“Each of us has a natural right, from God, to defend his person, his liberty, and his property.” –Frederic Bastiat

Porter Goss, who was at the briefing when Nancy was, also put paid to her lying. Pelosi is not in a position to agitate the White House over ANYTHING at this point. She’s the equivalent of a leper at a Debutante Ball and Obama isn’t going to want anything to do with her.

Besides, The Imperial Pelosi was quoted as saying that Obama would have to work with Congress if he wanted to get anything done right after he was elected. When I read that, I knew that she was living on borrowed time anyway. This is the best reason to get rid of her know. Many Dems despise the woman themselves.

Simply by allowing the idea of criminal prosecution or disbarment proceedings against the Bush administration lawyers to have any life at all TBP has hurt his own credibility and all administrations to come. That can’t be undone, no matter what Obama/Congressional Democrats decide to do in the future about the issue.