Pelosi: “The Dog Ate My Homework”
By Mitch Berg
Pelosi throws underlings, colleagues and/or predecessors under the bus:
“I wasn’t briefed, I was informed that somebody else had been briefed about it,” she said.
What has that woman been doing for the past four years, besides browbeating the Air Force for nicer planes for her trips home?
May 14th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Keeeep digging, old gal.
BTW, Mitch. You should put up something about Michele Bachmann’s new anti-ACORN bill. She’s going to mercilessly beat Barney Frank about the head with it, and you’ll want to be out in front.
Been a good week, so far; hadn’t it?
May 14th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
So is this latest version of her story going to be called “pretty credible evidence” by some folks?
May 14th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Meanwhile, Cheney sits in his chair, grabs some popcorn with one hand and dabs the sweat from his brow with a handkerchief in his other hand.
May 14th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
I’m guessing the sweat is from pacer induced tachyarrithmia.
May 14th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
Couldn’t be that, K-Rod. I have heard pretty credible evidence that Cheney is a heartless bastard, so such a thing isn’t possible.
May 14th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Pelosi must be schooling Napoiltano. Now that “right wing extremist” warning that crapped all over returning veterens has been pulled, and she claims it “wasn’t authorized”.
Frauds, the lot of them.
May 14th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Yeah, whereas those, like Cheney, or say.. all of you righties, who backed Cheney and what he did, you all, you’re the REAL Americans, not frauds at all – nope. You surely don’t bitch about Pelosi’s supposed involvment.
Mitch, in case you missed the subtext, there is the fact that the administration PURPOSEFULLY briefed some people on one part of a subject, and briefed others on the rest. Pelosi was PROHIBITED from discussing her briefings, as were other people – so she couldn’t corroberate information, and neither could the others. If you can explain what she was supposed to do to know what had been told to others, I’ll buy your BS argument that she was ‘throwing others under the bus” – but until then, it sounds a helluva lot like she was simply saying, “Some other people were told – or so I was told – but I wasn’t”, which has the likely happy coincidence of being both true, and more believable than the insinuation you’re making.
May 14th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
The next shoe to drop will be a video of Pelosi waterboarding Khalid Sheik Muhamad while eavesdropping on a phone conversation without a warrant.
May 14th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Serious question for Peev, DG, Bill, Rep. Porkerstar…
Should President Obama be impeached or just charged with crimes for “torturing” some of our brave soldiers in the military?
May 14th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Peev’s insanity knob just hit eleven.
May 14th, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Oh. My. Gawd.
Have you actually seen Pelosi’s press conference? You can almost smell the lies hanging in the air like a bean fart!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/30745139#30745139
I especially like the part where she nervously shuffles back to her speech text…
Mark my words; when the CIA starts dribbling out the truth (I bet the copy machine has a line three deep right now), this video is going to be used to beat this ‘bat to a bloody pulp.
Is this the beginning of the end for the Obamanation? Prob’ly not, but you can see it from here.
May 14th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Even CNN seems to smell the blood in the water:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/14/pelosi.waterboarding/index.html
“House Minority Leader John Boehner said Pelosi’s comments “continue to raise more questions than provide answers.””
“Asked about Pelosi’s allegations that Republican policy was leading the country astray, Boehner said, “I think the problem is that the speaker has had way too many stories on this issue.””
May 14th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Peev prolly watched Nancy’s lie-fest, but she said the magic words “Bush Administration” at the beginning, and he glazed over. Just the way she intended.
May 14th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Is this the beginning of the end for the Obamanation? Prob’ly not, but you can see it from here.
Pelosi is expendable as far as Obama is concerned. Where it gets interesting is that Steny Hoyer is next up and he doesn’t have much use for Pelosi or her acolytes, which wouldn’t bode well for Betty McCollum.
May 14th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Just watched the video. God help us, this idiot is two heartbeats away from the White House. The CIA lied to Congress repeatedly. She makes this claim right after claiming she wasn’t “informed” of the content of the briefing.
Liar.
May 14th, 2009 at 5:03 pm
What are the odds that Peev, DG, or Bill will answer my question?
May 14th, 2009 at 8:16 pm
San Fran Nan picked the wrong fight here. The CIA was probably fine with her going after Bush and Cheney et al for political reasons. However, when you start going after CIA members and calling for thier heads, they take it personally.
May 14th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
Remember how this started?
Obama stopped the tribunals for terrorists, announced that he would close Guantanamo, and end the policy of ‘harsh interrogations’ when appropriate. On Mar. 15 Cheney publicly criticized this move & said it would make the country less safe. Then lo & behold, Obama’s JD decided it would release the ‘torture memos’. Talk of investigations began to circulate on capital hill, blogs, and the MSM. Cheney didn’t back down, and Pelosi is being made to look like the dissembling fool that she is. It looks like Bush’s dad still has contacts in the CIA.
Apparently Obama hasn’t figured out that DC ain’t Chicago. His short resume is tripping him up.
May 14th, 2009 at 11:27 pm
It looks like Bush’s dad still has contacts in the CIA.
You don’t know DC. Agencies look after themselves, especially those who specialize in surveillance and information gathering. You rarely see a politician with an IQ above room temperature giving agencies like the CIA and (especially) FBI serious grief.
Pelosi was just dumb. There’s no way she couldn’t know that dumping on the CIA agents directly would bring out the knives. Maybe there were too many near-term botox treatments, or maybe she thought Obama had them under control. Lord knows she doesn’t have enough real friends in there.
And the knives are coming out: Hoyer is hanging her out to twist in the wind on this one. H*ll, he’s amping up the wind machine even more!
May 15th, 2009 at 12:50 am
Well, krod, I’ll take a shot at your question.
Neither. If you think really hard, you might be able to figure out why. swiftee might be able to supply you with a gay joke if you don’t figure it out.
May 15th, 2009 at 1:48 am
According to this:
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/15/us-restart-military-trials-detainees/
Obama will restart the military tribunals for suspected terrorists.
If true, the score is Cheney 1, Obama 0.
Given the many Bush GWOT policies that Obama is making his own, soon even his more insane backers will be faced with having to either hate Obama or love GW Bush. Serves them right.
May 15th, 2009 at 8:05 am
Well it looks like the real action is going to be over the CIA contractors anyways, the fuzzy line of responsibility they had, and the immunity from prosecution the 93rd congress gave them. I remember hearing on NPR back when this was happening that experienced, retired army interrogators were puzzled over why they were not being recalled when private contractors who were running a tab of 100K each were being pulled in.
I’m not going to go down the “private army” conspiracy route, but my suspicion is those responsible for bringing on the contractors thought they could better control a situation where the people doing the work were under different rules than someone who had taken an oath and had a well-defined responsibilities and command chain.
As for Pelosi – she has clay feet for sure, but it all seems too orchestrated to be anything but a distraction and the usual political game of “I’ll pull you down into the gutter with me” mentality. What a way to show your side is “better” 🙁
Oh, and K-Rod: 0%. Nice try. Not playing that game.
May 15th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Is it really “I’ll pull you down into the gutter with me”, Bill Haverberg?
I see it more as “You say I’m standing in a gutter, so why are you standing here beside me?”. Showing you are “better” than obvious hypocrites is pretty easy, I guess. *shrug*
May 15th, 2009 at 11:32 am
“Neither.”
Thanks for answering. Would your answer be the same if we swapped “Obama” with “Bush”, stooj?
Bill H, I will ask the honest questions while you keep playing your partisan lefty politics talking points games. I knew you were too much a coward to answer the question. At least you have the company of DG and peev.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Um, K-Rod, Obama was a Senator in Illinois at the time. It is highly unlikley that he was briefed in the way we know that the Liar of the House was. So the correct answer to your question is none.
Unless Richard Daily has contacts at the CIA. Which wouldn’t surprise me.
May 15th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Present.
May 15th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Why is this even an issue?
Her presidential candidate won, didn’t he?
May 15th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
“Pelosi is expendable as far as Obama is concerned. Where it gets interesting is that Steny Hoyer is next up and he doesn’t have much use for Pelosi or her acolytes, which wouldn’t bode well for Betty McCollum.”
The sharks smell blood in the water, and they aren’t all Repubs by a stretch. Pelosi has plenty of enemies in the Dem camp, and they’ll watch to see if she bleeds out before they think of applying a tourniquet.
This will almost be too much fun to watch!
May 15th, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Now Panetta is calling Pelosi a liar:
Panetta, President Obama’s pick to run the clandestine agency and President Clinton’s former chief of staff, wrote in a memo to CIA employees Friday that “CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing ‘the enhanced techniques that had been employed,'” according to CIA records.
http://thehill.com/index2.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=82488&pop=1&page=0&Itemid=70
What fun!
May 15th, 2009 at 8:14 pm
Yes, krod, it would. That’s easy to figure out if you understand the nature of consent.
Now you have to call Kermit a liberal fascist because he disagreed with you, right?
May 16th, 2009 at 1:44 am
Why not embrace term ‘liberal fascism’, Disco?
It just means national socialism that is not ethnically based & that allows a wide range of personal freedoms. Isn’t this what Obama wants?
May 20th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
“Should President Obama be impeached or just charged with crimes for “torturing” some of our brave soldiers in the military? ”
I don’t know to what Kermit is refering, stooj. Obama is currently “torturing” US citizens in SEAL training.
Terry, you use the word “wide” quite liberally.
I think stooj should embrace the term Liberal Fascism. If the shoe fits…