Holding Pelosi’s Feet to the Water

By 10 Comments 973 views

“They mislead us all the time,”
-Nancy Pelosi, 2009

Remember that? Covered here, here, here, and here (I’m sure I missed another dozen posts). The next week in anticipation of her weekly news conference, she avoids the topic and the press lets her off the hook. The press should have hung on to the story like a tenacious pit-bull until she either resigned or the truth outed. Instead, there she still sits…affecting our nation.

Today, Marc Thiessen, in wake of the release of Jose Rodriguez’s new book, Hard Measures, holds her feet to the water once again:

In his new book, “Hard Measures,” Rodriguez reveals that he led a CIA briefing of Pelosi, where the techniques being used in the interrogation of senior al-Qaeda facilitator Abu Zubaida were described in detail. Her claim that she was not told about waterboarding at that briefing, he writes, “is untrue.”

“We explained that as a result of the techniques, Abu Zubaydah was compliant and providing good intelligence. We made crystal clear that authorized techniques, including waterboarding, had by then been used on Zubaydah.” Rodriguez writes that he told Pelosi everything, adding, “We held back nothing.”

How did she respond when presented with this information? Rodriguez writes that neither Pelosi nor anyone else in the briefing objected to the techniques being used. Indeed, he notes, when one member of his team described another technique that had been considered but not authorized or used, “Pelosi piped up immediately and said that in her view, use of that technique (which I will not describe) would have been ‘wrong.’ ” She raised no such concern about waterboarding, he writes. “Since she felt free to label one considered-and-rejected technique as wrong,” Rodriguez adds, “we went away with the clear impression that she harbored no such feelings about the ten tactics [including waterboarding] that we told her were in use.”

So we’re left with a “he said-she said” standoff? Not at all. Rodriguez writes that there’s contemporaneous evidence to back his account of the briefing. Six days after the meeting took place, Rodriguez reveals, “a cable went out from headquarters to the black site informing them that the briefing for the House leadership had taken place.” He explains that “[t]he cable to the field made clear that Goss and Pelosi had been briefed on the state of AZ’s interrogation, specifically including the use of the waterboard and other enhanced interrogation techniques.”

Rodriguez asks, “So Pelosi was another member of Congress reinventing the truth. What’s the big deal?” The big deal, he explains, is “the message they are sending to the men and women of the intelligence community who to this day are being asked to undertake dangerous and sometimes controversial actions on behalf of their government. They are told that the administration and Congress ‘have their back.’ You will forgive CIA officers if they are not filled with confidence.”

Rodriguez compares Pelosi’s actions to the opening scene of the old TV series “Mission: Impossible,” “in which the operatives were told that if anything went wrong, their leaders would ‘disavow any knowledge of your actions.’ That is not how it should work in the real world,” he writes.

It is a big deal for another reason. If Rodriguez is right, it means that Pelosi stood up in a Capitol Hill news conference and lied with a straight face to the American people; that she falsely accused a dedicated civil servant of lying to Congress as part of a political cover-up. Pelosi is hoping to become House speaker again after the November elections. Do we really want someone so ethically challenged to be third in line to the presidency?

Rodriguez’s book is out today. Expect him to continue making his rounds on the media circuit to promote his book (60 Minutes interview aired last night, along with an appearance on CBS this morning).

10 Responses to “Holding Pelosi’s Feet to the Water”

  1. 1


    The left and the RINOs like McCain always say that “Intel gathered through torture is not reliable”. That could be true for actual torture where actual physical harm is done to the victim. Experienced people can get good Intel by using psychological techniques. The victim may think he is being tortured, but no harm comes to him.

    Pelosi and company knew this and she was briefed. So, now our president kills terrorists from a distance instead of gathering information that may roll up the whole organization. This administration believes it is more human to kill them than to psychologically interrogate them. The part that is difficult for me to believe is that so many people will still defend and worse, vote for them!

  2. 2

    Nan G


    Have you ever played ”Six Degrees of Separation?”
    Obama kills all terrorists he can with drones so they cannot be connected to the very people he is sending our tax dollars to….over the objection of our Congress.
    To the very people he wants to meet with without pre-conditions.
    Obama wants to support and encourage certain non-secular Islamist factions of Islam inside Egypt, Iran and even the taliban in Afghanistan.
    No wonder he doesn’t want any terrorists to survive contact with our forces.

  3. 3



    And don’t forget, Randy, that Obama is the first President in the history of our nation to assassinate an American citizen, although on foreign soil, without Constitutionally protected due process.

  4. 4


    @Nan G:

    Take the time to watch Rumors of War III on YouTube. If you are not really p.o.ed after watching it, then you have no love for this nation (but I know you do, Nan).

  5. 5



    Take the time to watch Rumors of War III on YouTube. If you are not really p.o.ed after watching it, then you have no love for this nation (but I know you do, Nan).

    Good program. I found it educational, but not surprising.

  6. 6



    Under Bush, we captured the bad guys (Saddam/KSM). Under Obama they are killed. Guess that way they cannot rat Obama’s Muslim connections out.

  7. 7


    @Nan G:

    /agree – I’m a big fan of the drone war, but it’s funny. What’s more ethical. Captured alive then waterboarded? Or just eating a missle “without trial” (and screw any collatorial) for breakfast?

    What’s even more a sham is they tried their version of the trial route with Khalid Shaikh Mohammed but that didn’t poll too well. One could surmize that it’s a lot easier to avoid these and Gitmo type complications if you: KILL THEM ALL. The irony is too good. But like I said, fan.

  8. 8



    “first President in the history of our nation to assassinate an American citizen”

    Tough call when the citizen declares war on the country of their origin with a blood martyrdom “praise be allah” promise of death and mayhem upon their fellow citizens.

    I understand the argument of Constitutionality.

    But if your break it down to the primordial question of life and death, and death is al qaeda types stated agenda of jiahad (no one told them the war was over), I think life trumps. If you want to kill maim me, I hope and want you dead. Period. Kill You Dead***. You can’t convince me otherwise. And I think preventing one from killing me (me being all inclusive for everyone in USA) makes for a strong argument regarding methods involved to those ends.

    ***cia/fbi/nsa data synthesis analysts – plz read in context 😉

  9. 9


    Words escape regarding the pelosibot… euphanasia is the best i can do. I was a humanist, once. Now, something… else.

    Came here looking for someone. Where may it be

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *