Pelosi: Torture protest improper in '03
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi learned in early 2003 that the Bush administration was waterboarding terror detainees but didnt protest directly out of respect for appropriate legislative channels, a confidant of the San Francisco Democrat said Monday.
It only became proper to protest when there was a political opening, and there was no opening to protest the interrogation of terrorists in '03. | The Pelosi camps version of events is intended to answer two key questions posed by her critics: When, precisely, did she first learn about waterboarding? And why didnt she do more to stop it?
Because she agreed with it ... | Pelosi has disputed a CIA document, released last week, that shows she was briefed in September 2002 on the particular interrogation techniques the United States had used on Al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah. Pelosi has said she was told then only that the Bush administration was considering using certain techniques in the future and that it had the legal authority to do so.
But theres no dispute that on Feb. 4, 2003 five months after Pelosis September meeting CIA officials briefed Pelosi aide Michael Sheehy and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.), then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, on the specific techniques that had been used on Zubaydah including waterboarding. Harman was so alarmed by what she had heard, she drafted a short letter to the CIAs general counsel to express profound concerns with the tactic going so far as to ask if waterboarding had been personally approved by the president.
According to the Pelosi confidant, Sheehy told Pelosi about the briefing and later informed Pelosi, the newly elected minority leader, that Harman was drafting a protest letter. Pelosi told Sheehy to tell Harman that she agreed with the letter, the Pelosi insider said. But she did not ask to be listed as a signatory on the letter, the source said, and there is no reference to her in it.
Leave no fingerprints just in case ... | Pelosi and Harman, sometimes bitter rivals, have still not discussed the controversy since it broke three weeks ago, according to Democratic insiders.
Sheehy has not responded to several calls and e-mails seeking comment on what he told Pelosi during this period. But the Pelosi confidant who spoke to POLITICO on the condition of anonymity insisted that Pelosi did all that she could have done. She felt that the appropriate response was the letter from Harman, because Jane was the one who was briefed, said the person. Pelosi never got briefed on it personally, and when Harman got a no response from the CIA, there was nothing more that could be done.
Republicans arent buying it. If Nancy was so concerned about the waterboarding, why did she let someone else write the letter? asked Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), the ranking Republican on the intelligence committee. If she was so upset, why did she let someone else raise objections?
Bingo. Pelosi was trying to play things both ways. Typical Dhimmicrat ... |
Posted by: Steve White 2009-05-12 |