About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Wallace: "If it turns out that Speaker Pelosi is wrong and has misled the country about what the CIA did ... should she step down?"

May 17, 2009 1:55 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Does Fox News want to boot Pelosi from the speaker's chair?

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Leftym0m79 (May 17, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
      6 1
      Because saying that the CIA mislead you is so much worse than, oh say, lying about WMDs and connections between Al Queda and Iraq.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by loonz (May 17, 2009 2:07 pm ET)
        7  
        One of the job descriptions of the CIA is to intentionally mislead so they can keep their secrets hidden.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 17, 2009 2:31 pm ET)
          3  
          But with Bob Graham's notes backing up Pelosi, the CIA now has implausible deniability.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by fairliberal (May 17, 2009 2:56 pm ET)
          5
        Did Hussein have WMDs at one time, and did he want the world to think he still had them? Well he succeeded. And there were links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, there was no evidence of co-operation on 9/11 however.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by loonz (May 17, 2009 3:35 pm ET)
          3  
          No. He said he didn't have them but in right-wing world that was code for he did have them.

          There were no more links between Iraq and Al Qaeda than any other country.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by solon (May 17, 2009 6:01 pm ET)
          2  
          Not collaborative links as the Senate comittee investigating this said DIRECTLY. No other kind of link matters what they had was a couple of meetings and NO history of co-operating on ANYTHING. The fact that he ONCE had WMDs means WHAT in context of INVADING in 2003 when he was SAYING he didnt have them, when he allowed the inspectos in and THEY were saying they couldnt find any and were going wherever they wanted. That they needed ONLY a few more months to say definitivly whether there were any there or not and Bush decided he needed to invade NOW so they WOULDNT be able to tell the world there werent any. Not only wasnt there any evidence of co-operation NO INTELLIGENCE AGENCY KNOWN believed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 including our CIA
          Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (May 17, 2009 7:17 pm ET)
          1  
          Okay Fairliberal...Now may I ask..If he said he had WMDs'. how in the world do you attack with ground troops, a madman, who HAS WMD's and has used them before. Simply, you don't. If you do and he uses them, we must retaliate with our own WMDs'. And then we would've been the madmen.
          The administration knew that he did not possess these weapons or they would not have sent ground troops into that country.
          You logic is just plain ridiculous.
          If we wanted to be sure, we would not have forced the Inspectors to leave. Cheney wanted that country and he made sure his puppet had the reasons. Bush/Cheney are war criminals and must be prosecuted for the killing of innocent Iraqis for NO reason.
          If you can explain how you send the grunts to battle WMDs', I'll be glad to laugh at your inane reasons.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by princeofwheels (May 17, 2009 7:25 pm ET)
             
          fairliberal,

          Easy question for you.

          How do you attack a country where the leader is a madman, who HAS WMDs' and who has used them before? With ground troops!!! That is what we did. How dumb is that? If he had the WMDs' and used them on our troops, we retaliate with our WMDs' and destroy a country (which we eventually did on the installment plan). Therefore, no one can explain to me WHY anyone would attack WMDs with grunts.
          Cheney/Bush knew they weren't there and attacked because they wanted to attack. If not their irresponsibility is one for the ages. They are criminals for killing many Iraqi civilians and should be tried.
          We made sure the Hans Blix and his gang were forced to leave before their job was finish.
          You post is one based in ChickenHawk FantasyLand. No substance fairliberal. You struck out this time.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by princeofwheels (May 17, 2009 7:26 pm ET)
               
            Sorry for the double post but my keyboard went to sleep and I didn't see the original post..either way, you are up fairliberal.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by loonz (May 17, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
         
      How would you figure out what she knew if there's no tape? Maybe there was a tape and the CIA destroyed it.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (May 17, 2009 2:30 pm ET)
      3  
      Chris, if it turns out that you once again haven't a clue, will you quit your job, too?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by freeopinions (May 17, 2009 2:56 pm ET)
         
      You know what all of you at Media Matters are missing here? Let me point it out:

      Nancy Pelosi (and who knows how many other Democrats?)knew that that the United States of America was torturing prisoners. They were in a position to, if not stop it, make it a very big deal, hold hearings, go to the media, and constantly and consistently expose and oppose it.

      They did nothing. Nothing.

      They continued to provide funding outside of the national budget, they refused to hold hearings, they refused to oppose the Cheney mad-ministration. Even after the Republicans were thrown out, the Democrats still refuse to even talk about the war, the conduct of the principals, or hold an investigation. Why? Because they, Pelosi, Reid and the rest were and are complicit in all of it.

      Should Pelosi resign? Yes, and immediately. Along with everyone else in both parties who supported this imperialistic criminal debacle. Then they should all be put on trial for war crimes.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by magnolialover (May 17, 2009 5:43 pm ET)
      1  
      I am wondering, with all of the right wing bluster lately about Pelosi and how she has somehow insulted the entire US intelligence community, how do these guys square it when Bush said that the CIA gave HIM bad intelligence in the lead up to the Iraq war. Should Bush apologize because he was lying as well? How about you republicans that keep saying the same thing Bush did about the CIA giving bad intelligence?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by JimInTheBay (May 17, 2009 6:13 pm ET)
      3  
      damn pelosi for coming up with the idea for torturing those detainees... damn her for teaching the operatives how to waterboard for best effect... and damn her for hiding sadam's W.M.D.s just when bush needed most to find them..... and damn her for smoking on the Hindenburg.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by christopher howard (May 17, 2009 9:11 pm ET)
           
        Pelosi and the Hindenburg? I think I see the next Fox "News Alert."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by roninkannushi1711 (May 17, 2009 8:17 pm ET)
         
      Any excuse, to shift blame from the real cause, shows the lack of objectivity. I want the Justice Dept. to start at the top and work its way down. After V.P. Cheney gets convicted, continue the cycle.
      Report Abuse