Know Nothing Nancy.

“So, yes, I am saying that they are misleading, that the CIA was misleading the Congress.”

-Nancy Pelosi May 14, 2009

With this comment, Speaker Pelosi went all-in in her war of words with the CIA. For her sake, she had better be telling the truth.

Now I do not claim to know whether she is being honest or not, but my gut and the evidence that has been presented, tell me that that is not the case.

During the press conference, where she uttered the above statement, she looked like a person that was clutching at any excuse that would shroud the truth. From the finger waving, stammering, wavering voice, nervous smile, meek attempts to escape the room and theatrical hand gestures, she seemed scared, cornered and desperate.

In addition, comments made by current CIA director Leon Panetta and Representative Porter Goss and the CIA briefings regarding the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques that were recently made public certainly indicate that Pelosi was well aware of what the CIA was doing.

So for the sake of argument, let’s say she is lying, as I do think she is. Is this really the big deal that Congressional Republicans and Conservative commentators are making this out to be? After all, half-truths, fabrications and deceptions are as part of the American political system as baseball, apple pie and jazz are to the American culture.

I do think this is different though.

This is not some politician trying to spin their voting record on a politically sensitive topic. This is not an exaggerated claim by a politician that is trying to score cheap political points during an election cycle. What this is, is a member of Congress, the Speaker of the House to be specific, making fabricated statements regarding our intelligence community and how they have kept and are keeping us safe from a rogue enemy that specializes in terrorism. All of this, in a time of war.

So if this is really the case and Speaker Pelosi is lying, what should be done?

While I do not believe this is grounds for impeachment, I do think that Speaker Pelosi should be censured and have her position of Speaker of the House taken away from her if she is indeed lying.

While being censured is merely an administrative punishment, it would at least be in the Congressional records forever. I think this would act as, both, a just punishment and an effective deterrent to future elected officials that wish to lie regarding such intelligence issues.

Stripping her of her role as Speaker of the House is certainly a strict punishment, but if she is lying about the conduct of the CIA, I do not believe she should continue to serve as Speaker of the House… someone that is two heartbeats away from the presidency.

I know that this is harsh, but lying about sensitive intelligence information, denigrating the brave and effective intelligence professionals within our government, potentially alienating us from our allies and giving strategic and public relations ammo to our enemies are all incredibly egregious consequences of her reckless behavior.

Now, neither of these actions have any chance of actually happening. I realize that.

This current mini, and potentially epic-sized, scandal, does, however, present the Republican Party with the ability to show voters in 2010 yet another stark contrast between them and the Obama/Pelosi/Reid cabal that is currently running things in Washington, this time on an issue where the Democrats are clearly on the wrong side of public opinion.

That could be the worst punishment Speaker Pelosi could possibly receive.

That’s all for now folks. Until next time, take care and be well.

-John

This certainly won’t help me sleep easier tonight.

It’s nice to see that the future director of the CIA will put the rights of suspected terrorists ahead of the safety of American citizens.

Look, I don’t want innocent people tortured, and if that were to happen, that would really be terrible. However, I am not comfortable with shelving incredibly successful forms of interrogation, and thereby risking the lives of Americans, to look like “good guys” to the rest of the world.

I just find this incredibly troubling.

Great Blog from USA Today

Have you ever heard a brilliant idea and instantly became mad, frustrated and disappointed for yourself for not thinking of it first?

Well, that’s how I feel about Marc Thiessen’s blog from yesterday’s USA Today.

It lists some proposed questions that he would like to see senators ask Leon Panetta, President Obama’s choice to lead the CIA.

Here are some of the best ones:

• Last year you wrote in the Washington Monthly that even if waterboarding could stop the next terrorist attack or suicide bomber, it should not be permitted. According to our intelligence community, waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques President Obama has banned helped stop a number of terrorist attacks, including a plot to hijack a passenger plane and fly it into the Library Tower in Los Angeles and a plot to fly passenger planes into Heathrow Airport and the Canary Wharf in London. Knowing these facts, do you still believe waterboarding should not be permitted under any circumstances? And if so, which of these attacks would you prefer had not been stopped?

• Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — the mastermind of 9/11 — reportedly underwent waterboarding while in CIA custody. Since you believe waterboarding is torture, doesn't it follow that the evidence against Mohammed should be thrown out under the "exclusionary rule" and his case dismissed?

• Since 9/11, the CIA has successfully conducted targeted killings of senior al-Qaeda leaders by armed unmanned aerial vehicles. Will the CIA continue to use these tactics under your leadership? And if so, why is it acceptable for the CIA to conduct targeted killings of senior al-Qaeda leaders, but unacceptable to question senior al-Qaeda leaders using enhanced interrogation techniques?

• President Obama has pledged to intensify the hunt for al-Qaeda in Pakistan. If another senior al-Qaeda leader is captured, what will you do with him now that Guantanamo Bay and the CIA's secret prisons will be shuttered? What will you do when that terrorist — with intelligence on plots to attack America — refuses to talk? And if an attack that could have been prevented by enhanced interrogation techniques takes place, will you accept personal responsibility?

Please read the entire article, as it is an outstanding read.