Pelosi's burden of truth (SF Chronicle)

Sunday, May 17, 2009

... One would think that the people who suggested and implemented these methods should be feeling the brunt of the heat. But, for the moment, the focus has turned to Pelosi, who may or may not have been fully briefed about the tactics in 2002 ...

For weeks, Pelosi was circumspect about when she learned that the CIA was using these harsh techniques on terrorism suspects. According to the CIA, she was present at a September 2002 briefing where they discussed these techniques - but Pelosi says she didn't know waterboarding was being used until 2003. Last week, she accused the CIA of "misleading" Congress.

What is clear is that someone is not telling the truth. What is less clear is whether an objection from Pelosi or anyone else in 2002 - when the administration seemed brazenly contemptuous of the laws against torture - could have stopped the practice ...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/17/ED9K17LB66.DTL

That's why it's gone one this long.

:evilgrin:

who were party leaders, who learned that BushCo was either using or going to use "enhanced interrogation tactics", yet failed to stand up and yell "WAIT. THIS IS WRONG. STOP."

Rep. Pelosi was one of the ranking Democrats in the House. If she had gone public saying that she had attended a classified briefing and could not disclose the content of the briefing, but wanted to let everyone know that the Bush administration was up to some seriously illegal acts--or contemplating them enough that they felt compelled to brief her--that would have gotten major attention.

That act would have shined the light on BushCo and changed this whole scenario. Maybe it wouldn't have stopped the torture, but it would have had the effect of unequivocally putting the Democrats on the right side of that issue. Instead, we're wondering what and when she knew about it. And I'm wondering, as I have been for years, why she sat on her hands.