ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.Now that Pelosi has been caught lying perhaps that takes the wind out of the far left's sails on going after Bushco. Matter of fact, this needs to be nipped soon because any protracted scandal involving Pelosi only serves to make Bushco look better going forward. Surely the left will invent some ingenious spin that the bloggers will feed the mainstreamers, but this is pretty raw meat.
Meanwhile, this could also focus some light on the ACLU's lawsuit against Boeing for providing the aircraft used in Bush's rendition program and Obama's current defense of it. Time for a new story to grab the headlines.
Cheney just can't keep it zipped these days, telling radio host Scott Hennen the US didn't just lay KSM and others on the waterboard without first trying the conventional methods. And they worked. Right on cue, here's the HuffPo's Sam Stein furthering a convenient distortion in an effort to call Cheney a liar:
The remarks, delivered during an interview with Scott Hennen, a conservative North Dakota radio host, glossed over the 266 instances in which the United States reportedly used waterboarding on two terrorist suspects -- a figure that would suggest the technique was either not effective or not really used as a last-resort option.In other words, the Bush folks were just having fun dunkin' some terrorist mug. Problem is, his numbers don't add up to KSM's five count, nor do they square with the government. But like the 1 million Iraqi dead canard, there are some who will stoop to any depth if the cause is furthered.
PUSHBACK TIME 5/8/09
Everyone was wondering how the left would spin this. One way is to discourage any mainstream coverage, which has been largely successful--Drudge remains the only site prominently covering the story. Meanwhile some on the left are pointing to this Plum Line article, which mentions an accompanying memo sent by CIA Director with the original package of documents that appeared to finger Speaker Pelosi. Sargent makes a pretty big leap:
That would appear to be a concession that the CIA isn’t willing to vouch for the accuracy of the info about the briefings in the docs, and that only further inquiry will produce a reliable recounting of what happened.Or, that Panetta knew the documents were damaging and was trying to soften the political blow. The memo indicates these were the best recollections based on Memos for the Record. Other than recordings, what else is there?