Nancy Pelosi, Porter Goss, Bob Graham, and Richard Shelby may be legally culpable for torture

[WeDidIt]

Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, who in 2002 was the ranking Democrat on the House committee, has said in public statements that she recalls being briefed on the methods, including waterboarding. She insists, however, that the lawmakers were told only that the C.I.A. believed the methods were legal — not that they were going to be used.

By contrast, the ranking Republican on the House committee at the time, Porter J. Goss of Florida, who later served as C.I.A. director, recalls a clear message that the methods would be used.

“We were briefed, and we certainly understood what C.I.A. was doing,” Mr. Goss said in an interview. “Not only was there no objection, there was actually concern about whether the agency was doing enough.”

Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida, who was committee chairman in 2002, said in an interview that he did not recall ever being briefed on the methods, though government officials with access to records say all four committee leaders received multiple briefings.

Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the committee, declined to discuss the briefings.

NY Times Article About Torture

All four were briefed on torture in their roles as senior members of Intelligence committees.

All four signed off on torture.

[peacebird]

1. Let the chips fall where they may, but hold all involved legally accountable.

[WeDidIt]

3. Agreed, take the investigation whweresoever it leads

If Democrats are culpable, put them on trial.

[TornadoTN]

12. Completely agree - this is the moment that we define our Nation and the laws it is built upon

While we know it will be a very brutal blow for Republicans, we also know that there was a great deal of complicity by our side that made these things possible.

I honestly don't care who is taken down by this. I just want justice and some restoration of the basic principles of our justice system. Complicity isn't something that can be dismissed.

[Mari333]

2. Nancy has been covering her own ass from day one

impeachment is off the table means 'dont expose my hysteria and bad decisions'. Too late, Nancy Pants. You are as guilty as the rest of them .

[KittyWampus]

20. you've been throwing the word "hysteria" around a lot, I noticed. Ironic, it seems you're projecting

your own inability to process the situation.

[ClayZ]

4. Impeachment was off he table!

Maybe she will be sharing a table with other LAW BREAKERS!


K and R

[KharmaTrain]

5. Pelosi Was Caught In A Catch-22

The same one Jay Rockefeller and other intel committee members were. While they were briefed on these programs (and not sure how in depth), but this was yet another game by boooosh, who had to notify ranking members of the House & Senate, but also these people were sworn to secrecy. Had Pelosi come out with this info, she could have been violated all types of laws and boooshie used this to blackmail her and Graham and later Rockefeller. Does this make them signatories to torture? My jury is out.

I'd sure like to know what Goss knew...he's got a lot of questions lingering out there. He was brought in to put a "leash" on the CIA and didn't last a year...his buddy Dusty Foggo and their naked poker games with hookers was just a little too much for even a corrupt regime to deal with. No doubt, if there are prosecutions of those who tortured, Goss would be one of the first witnesses I'd call...if he wasn't already in the dock with the other defendants.

[Supersedeas]

13. I find it stunning that Graham does not recall--what is the purpose of being on a

special subcommittee if you aren't going to pay attention.

[KharmaTrain]

17. Selective Recall

Look at how "I don't recall" has become the most popular answer to any question. Raygun made it popular thanks to his altzheimers...others now use it to hide their complicity.

If Graham admits knowing he just proves he was blackmailed like the others. Not recalling means not having to answer questions.

[Vinca]

6. If prosecution scooped up a few Democrats along with the Republicans,

that would be fine with me. If they approved torture they should be held accountable. This certainly explains why Pelosi was under the Bush administration's thumb and wouldn't even allow the "i" word to be whispered.

[KittyWampus]

21. Where is there any evidence at all that any Democrats "approved" torture? THERE IS ZERO evidence

of that.

So the conjecture is purely bullshit.

No Democrats were involved in the shaping of the policy or implementing it.

[Vinca]

32. So you've got insider information that Democrats on Congressional

committees who had access to top secret information - and by law couldn't talk about it - are babes in the woods while the Republicans on those same committees who had the same information are guilty? I suppose Jane Harman can't be guilty of anything either, even though she's on tape making a deal. There certainly is the possibility both Democrats and Republicans in Congress were fed lies . . . but it's odd how quickly Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table, no questions asked. To believe all Democrats - just because they are Democrats - are pure as the driven snow is naive.

[MiniMe]

7. They knew about it, but I don't think they "signed off" on it

And they were probably under some kind of gag order that they couldn't talk about it. While I'm not crazy about Pelosi, I don't think she had much of a choice in this.

[Mari333]

8. she knew. she even cheerleaded it

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/258258

[rateyes]

9. She took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution.

The Constitution says that ALL treaties are part of the "supreme law of the land."

If she was told that the US was torturing people, then she was informed of war crimes taking place. She was obligated, regardless of being "sworn to secrecy," to report the crime. Failure to do so, if it happened, means that Pelosi committed a crime.

[proud2BlibKansan]

10. yes you are right

This was discussed here ad nauseum. It is repulsive but not illegal.

[WeDidIt]

11. The "Gang of Four" is a check and balance on the CIA

From the quoted article:

There was one more check on intelligence programs, one designed in the 1970s to make sure independent observers kept an eye on spy agencies: Congress. The Senate and House Intelligence Committees had been created in the mid-1970s to prevent any repeat of the C.I.A. abuses unearthed by the Senate’s Church Committee.

Emphasis mine.

[sampsonblk]

14. Let the chips fall where they may - nt

[merh]

15. Pelosi needs to resign as speaker and she needs to be

tried for violating the torture law. Authorizing torture is a crime. Remaining quiet while the crimes continued, she is a co-conspirator, she helped the torturers continue to torture.

She should have a fair trial, but she needs to be held accountable for her actions or silence.

[KittyWampus]

24. Where did Pelosi "authorize torture"? Provide actual proof she knew it was actually being used

ACTUAL PROOF.

And then you can account for how she and the entire Democratic party would have withstood the conflagration resulting from her leaking CLASSIFIED information.

You people are so fucked up.

[merh]

25. If she was briefed that they were using the techniques

and she did nothing - she remained silent, then she was part of the crime.

She had such authority in the house that they briefed her so she had the authority to speak out against it.

[KittyWampus]

26. Provide proof she was briefed they were ACTUALLY USING techinques. And part of that proof

must be she was given an actual list of techniques and what they entailed.

Also, you can explain how Pelosi would "speak out against it" when it was classified.

Then you can move on to how the Democratic party or the Left would withstand the conflagration of Pelosi leaking classified information.

[merh]

28. It doesn't matter how the party would have withstood the leak

What matters is the immoral and inhumane abuses, the violations of our laws.

Screw the party, this is about our nation and about humanity.

Pelosi said she was briefed on a lot of things, if she did her homework and truly cared, when she was told that they were going to waterboard she should have called for hearings on the technique and she should have filed suit asking the court to determine if the techniques were lawful.

She had a lot of options, I'd prefer she be human and care about what crimes are committed in our name than how to hold power for the party.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. So, why didn't she ask? Or, was it unnecessary?

[EFerrari]

33. Do you think she was the only person in the country who managed to miss Abu Ghraib?

And didn't put two and two together? And by that time, the Taguba investigation had already started in 2003.

That's some oversight we have going there!

[frylock]

40. i don't think you're capable of handling the truth..

somebody already provided a link. seems you deliberately ignored it in your vigorous defense of pelosi.

<snip>

Now, however, comes the news that Pelosi knew as early as 2002 that the U.S. was using waterboarding and other torture techniques and, far from objecting, appears to have cheered the tactics on.

The Washington Post reports that Pelosi, who was then a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee, was were informed by CIA officials at a secret briefing in September 2002, that waterboarding and other forms of torture were being used on suspected al-Queda operatives. That's bad. Even worse is the revelation that Pelosi was apparently supportive of the initiative.

According to the news reports, Pelosi has no complaint about waterboarding during a closed-door session she attended with Florida Congressman Porter Goss, a Republican who would go on to head the Central Intelligence Agency, Kansas Republican Senator Pat Roberts and Florida Democratic Senator Bob Graham.

"The reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement," recalls Goss.

<more>

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/258258

[UTUSN]

16. Let's name more of the names: TENET, YOO, psychologist Jm MITCHELL, CHEENEE, Shrub

The article cites "perfect storm of enthusiasm and ignorance," TENET as enthusiast and ignorant.


**********QUOTE********
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30338039//

Gruesome origins of 'torture' tactics overlooked

Officials failed to probe the history, efficacy of brutal interrogation methods
By Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti

.... ...Nor were most of the officials aware that the former military psychologist who played a central role in persuading C.I.A. officials to use the harsh methods had never conducted a real interrogation, or that the Justice Department lawyer most responsible for declaring the methods legal had idiosyncratic ideas that even the Bush Justice Department would later renounce. ....
.... But it was the C.I.A. that was proposing the methods, and John Yoo , the Justice Department official who was the principal author of a secret August 2002 memorandum that authorized the interrogation program, was mostly interested in making a case that the president’s wartime powers allowed for the harsh tactics. ....

...At a series of small-group and individual briefings attended by Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney, Ms. Rice and Attorney General John Ashcroft , Mr. Tenet and his deputy, John McLaughlin, laid out their case.
They made a persuasive duo, former officials who heard their pitch recalled. Mr. Tenet, an extroverted former Congressional staff member, was given to forceful language about the threat from Al Qaeda, which he said might well have had operations under way involving biological, radiological or even nuclear weapons. Mr. McLaughlin, a career intelligence analyst, was low-key and cerebral, and some White House officials said they found his support for the methods reassuring. ....

Ms. Rice insisted that Mr. Ashcroft not just pass along the conclusions of his Office of Legal Counsel, where Mr. Yoo worked, but give his personal assurance that the methods were legal under domestic and international law. He did.

The C.I.A. then gave individual briefings to the secretary of defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld , and the secretary of state, Colin L. Powell . Neither objected, several former officials said.

Mr. Cheney, whose top legal adviser, David S. Addington , was closely consulting with Mr. Yoo about legal justification, strongly endorsed the program. Mr. Bush also gave his approval, though what details were shared with him is not known. ....

(Congress briefed: ) "Gang of Four: " (Democrats ) Nancy PELOSI and Senator Bob GRAHAM. (Rethugs: ) Porter GOSS and Richard SHELBY.

********UNQUOTE********

[KittyWampus]

18. Bullshit. Pelosi didn't "sign off on torture" and I'm sick of the DU'ers peddling that crap.

First of all, it would have not only endangered her own career but the entire Democratic Party if she'd said anything publicly about CLASSIFIED info.

Second, as far as we know it wasn't told in the context that those methods were actually being used.

Blame the culprits and architects.

[WeDidIt]

22. Nope, she must be investigated as well

Sorry, but as a member of the Gang of Four, she is part of the chain of approval.

She must be investigated as well. She may or may not be culpable, but an investigation must be conducted.

[Mari333]

23. she didnt do her homework

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/258258

just like the other dems who didnt do their homework when they signed off on the stinking Patriot Act.

[NC_Nurse]

19. Fine. Let's find out the truth.

[WeDidIt]

30. That's the whole point

I'm not saying they ARE culpable, only that they MAY BE culpable.

It calls for investigation.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. So, the "Good Germans" in congress are using the "I didn't know" defense?

Of course, while being briefed, their mouths were taped shut so they couldn't ask the obvious question, "Are these methods being used?"

(Not so) Plausible deniability?

[Norquist Nemesis]

31. Catch-22 -- just as the Bushetals have devised

Any of the information would have been under 'highly classified' meaning if they said peep, Bush would have had them perp-walked down the steps of Congress (with prior notification to the media) and thrown in jail.

[glitch]

37. That is their defense.

It can mitigate their sentences when they are tried and convicted of war crimes.

[JCMach1]

34. I would believe Graham over Goss any day...

[unc70]

41. Graham only slightly over Goss. Goss not at all.

Porter Goss is too much the inside guy to believe at all. Even without giving credence to some of the more aggressive claims concerning Goss in the 1960's.

Graham is very well connected with the power elite (brother was military intelligence, married daughter of first head of World Bank and owner of the Washinton Post, committed "suicide" after talking a lot on night in Vegas, his widow then ran the Post following her fathers death (Katherine Graham)). Did not recall?

You know that there are a lot of very dangerous secrets buried out there when with just a little scratching of the surface gets these responses.

When the limited fallback cover stories used to firewall quickly put at risk leaders in both parties, one has to ponder just how damaging the worst would be and who is ultimately being protect.

Could our most outlandish conspiracy theories be true.

[flyarm]

47. i would not believe either one of them ..google up who Graham was meeting with the morning of 9/11

go ahead i dare you!!
Goss was part of the shadow government even back to the Kennedy assassination time..close ties to Bush 1 ..do read Barry and the Boys..

Porter Goss is pictured with the shadow government in Mexico with Barry Seal and all the other damn criminals that were part and parcel with the CIAdrug cartel...and Bay Of Pigs , and Kennedy Assasination.

Graham knew all the shit that was going down..he did a half assed job of getting a little info out ..but in essence he stayed silent.

[seemslikeadream]

35. chips fall may

[bvar22]

36. There are also some Democratic Senators who KNEW.....

...about he Torture (killings and rapes) committed at Abu-Ghraib as early as 2004, and have kept silent.
Hillary Clinton is among those Democratic Senators who were given a "special screening" of photos and videos that have NEVER been released to the public after the Senate "Investigation" (CoverUp).

THis is why ANY "bi-partisan Truth Commission" or Congressional Investigation will be a cover-up SCAM. BOTH Parties have too much skin in the game.

The ONLY way foreword is for Holder to pass this to an Independent Prosecutor.
The longer Obama/Holder avoid taking this step, the more they encourage the perception that they are protecting Torturers and War Criminals.

[glitch]

38. Yes - on the one hand.

On the other hand the longer they hold this over the war criminals' heads the more they will publicly spill their guts; pointing fingers at each other and trying to save their asses.

And that may be necessary for the country to get fully behind what will certainly be a grueling, nasty, humiliating and shameful - not just for the criminals but for all US citizens - ordeal.

An ordeal we all must go through or we will never evolve. IMO.

[bvar22]

39. No one is going to come clean...

...as long as there is a possibility that the Obama administration will cover for them.

The "Good Faith" exception to the Rule of Law that Obama conjured up last week won't induce anyone to come clean. That was code for "Keep Your Fucking Mouth Shut and we'll cover for you".

There is no such thing as Torturing in Good Faith.
The concept is laughable, and the fact that anyone is giving it the slightest credibility is deplorable.

Torture is a CRIME.
It has been a CRIME for a long time.
The USA put Japanese torturers TO DEATH for waterboarding not so long ago.
No one asked the Japanese if they were Torturing "in good faith".

If you want to see the roaches start to run....turn on the light.
Appoint a REAL Independent Prosecutor TODAY.
His phone will be ringing with War Criminals looking for a "deal" before the sun goes down.

[NM Independent]

42. Duh! That's why impeachment never happened, and we all knew it then! n/t

[lib2DaBone]

43. I hope and pray..... Porter Goss is a sniveling bueaurocrat...

[Coffee and Cake]

44. They should be held accountable and tried by a jury of their peers

[FreeJG]

45. They are because it IS what it IS.....

[sabrina 1]

46. I wouldn't be surprised if that were true

My only problem is with Porter Goss. I thought he went to jail for his role in Hookergate, another major scandal that just 'went away' even though we were told, airc, by people like Ed Rollins in the summer of 2005 that this would be a scandal that had the potential to 'bring down the government'. I remember him on Charlie Rose saying that, and it definitely looked that way. But then it went out of the news, just like all the other scandals, the AIPAC spy trial, the Niger Documents etc. All of these scandals received hardly any press coverage at all.

I blame the press more than anything. None of this, except for the proof that is now coming out, is new. Sy Hersch eg, was reporting on the torture scandal even before Abu Ghraib, but the rest of the media basically ignored it all.

Anyhow, it would explain why Nancy Pelosi et al were so against Impeachment. If she did know this, she is a disgrace. But, as I said, Porter Goss is not exactly a credible source.