Congressional Aide Confirms Pelosi's Claim

[jsamuel]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/08/waterboarding-not-discuss_n_200087.html

Waterboarding Not Discussed At CIA Briefings, Congressional Aide Says

A senior aide to another member of Congress briefed by the CIA around the same time as Speaker Nancy Pelosi tells the Huffington Post that the use of waterboarding was never mentioned at those briefings.

...

During an appearance on MSNBC in February, Pelosi said, "They did not brief us that these enhanced interrogations were taking place. They did not brief us that was - they were talking about an array of interrogations that they might have at their disposal... They may have given inference that there was some debate that waterboarding could be legal. Of course, I disagree with that. But the issue is, are you going to use such a thing? And they had not ever briefed us that that was the case."

On Wednesday, the CIA released a report describing the briefings it gave to members of Congress on the Bush administration's interrogation program. According to the report, Pelosi partook in a September 4, 2002 briefing on, among other things, "the use of on Abu Zubaydah." The report, which was drawn from recollections of the CIA officials, did not, however, specifically mention whether waterboarding was discussed at the briefing -- an absence that Pelosi's aides say validates her statements.

...

[cherokeeprogressive]

1. Anonymous Confirmation? I no longer accept anonymous sources as 100% truthful.

A "senior aide to another member of Congress" has no credibility in my book, especially without a name. Less credibility on this particular issue than even Speaker Pelosi herself.

[NNN0LHI]

5. What were the names of the people who said she was told then?

Take your time finding all those names I have plenty of time.

Don

[pnwmom]

8. Then you also must not accept the credibility of the CIA list itself,

since it was compiled from various anonymous sources, and the accompanying letter said that the information in it needs to be confirmed.

[walldude]

2. "They may have given inference that there was some debate

about whether or not it might be legal" And they had not briefed us that that was the case.

What kind of bullshit lawyer doublespeak is that? THey may have inferred, that it might be legal, but they weren't talking about using it? And you're buying this?

[jsamuel]

3. I am having a really hard time just trying to figure out what the purpose of these briefings were.

If they didn't talk about ACTUALLY using these methods, then why were they talking about them at all?

[leveymg]

4. The CIA "FORGOT" it had waterboarded Abu Zubaydeh the previous month, 83 times

I'm sure AZ was a bit more forgetful afterwards, as well.

[truedelphi]

6. So many detainees, so many torture procedures...

And so little time.

It's hard to keep on schedule, let alone remember it all!

[bemildred]

7. "Who knew that waterboarding would be important anyway?"

"We were just following orders."