I was shocked...SHOCKED, I tell you to see all the major news outlets and all the Sunday chat shows devouring Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. Aren't they all her liberal stooges?
Liberal media bullshit owned once again.
Oh, and while I think she did know what was going on back in 2002 and 2003 (making her guilty of complicity after the fact), SHE WASN'T THE ONE EXECUTING A POLICY OF TORTURE YOU FUCKING DUMB ASSES.
Nice try, righties. You should know by now that I will always be here to call you on your bullshit.
11 comments:
"Liberal media bullshit owned once again."
Really?
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/05/confirmed-ny-times-spiked-major-obama.html
And another:
"SHE WASN'T THE ONE EXECUTING A POLICY OF TORTURE YOU FUCKING DUMB ASSES".
She is essentially executing the policy by her complicity as she is on the oversight committee, part of the checks against something, you know, illegal. The Intelligence Committee is the primary committee in the House of Representatives charged with oversight of the United States intelligence community. She failed.
"You should know by now that I will always be here to call you on your bullshit."
Talk about projection!
Maybe you ought to pull your head out of your A$$ before you post any more. You can't seem to get anything right.
Wait, so Nancy Pelosi is now the one who drove the torture policy? I think you need to pull your head out of your ass, 6Kings, and tell us the difference between the LEGISLATIVE branch and the EXECUTIVE branch.
Sara, here is the point laid out for you:
While the policy was implemented by the executive branch, the CIA reports to the Senate and the House committee in intelligence matters. That is why the committees exist and are briefed. Oversight means watching over and guiding which they decided not to do. They failed in their oversight and now they claim it wasn't their fault.
From the CRS Report for Congress - Congressional Oversight of Intelligence: Current Structure and Alternatives 9/16/2008:
"The House and Senate intelligence panels have nearly identical jurisdictions for
the intelligence community. The House panel’s domain, however, also extends over
an area that the Senate’s does not: “tactical intelligence and intelligence-related
activities,” which covers tactical military intelligence. In another departure, the
House select committee has been given authority to “review and study on an
exclusive basis the sources and methods of entities” in the intelligence community.8"
http://fas.org/sgp/crs/intel/RL32525.pdf
By the way, you do know that congress writes the laws and Executive branch carries them out right?
Her character is the issue here. She's lying to the people she represents, sacrificing honesty to political expediency. But then, character has never been all that important to you folks on the left anyway, right? After all, you still lionize a man who lied to a grand jury - and to the people on national TV - about his sexual conduct in the Oval Office. If a man won't be honest about a relatively trivial matter like that, how on earth can you trust him for the big stuff?
6 Kings, please kindly unfuck yourself. They told Pelosi about it after the fact. If you think that she approved torture and then they went ahead with it, you are a fucking moron.
Given the political climate at the time, if she would've spoken up, she would've been accused of being a traitor. Hell, she might've been put in prison.
I agree Kevin. I have said before on this blog. The Democrats are just as much to blame (complicity after the fact) for the crimes of the Bush Administration. In fact, I think they knew they could play it to their political advantage in 2008 by basically doing nothing in the previous two years.
That being said, the driving force behind the law breaking was the executive branch. Pelosi might have character issues but she wasn't part of the psychotic sadists who decided the torturing people was cool.
Isn't the fact that the US tortured people more important than what a member of the minority party (who likely couldn't have done anything anyway) knew or didn't know?
"Given the political climate at the time, if she would've spoken up, she would've been accused of being a traitor." DICK
It is her job and you aren't holding her accountable - just being an ass and defender her incompetence. Nice. No wonder she keeps getting elected even though she is a proven liar and now coward. What, her feelings get her by being called a traitor and that allows her to get by? I want a job where I am not accountable too!
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjZkNGZiODM0YjNmODNkMWFhZDU5Mzk2ZDMwNGRmMDQ=
I don't think that the Republicans were psychotic sadists. I don't believe that they derived pleasure from these methods, but that the primary driving force was fear. Specifically, fear of another terrorist attack that would result in thousands more American dead. I don't excuse the use of torture, but to ascribe a sadistic motive is a bit much.
I don't think Republicans are sadists either. But there are quite a few people on the right who operate with the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality which is flat out moronic.
Post a Comment