Attacking Pelosi, Gingrich misrepresents Panetta statement
SUMMARY: Newt Gingrich misrepresented Leon Panetta's response to Nancy Pelosi's allegation that the CIA had misled her about its use of waterboarding.
During the May 20 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, in an attack on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) over her assertion that the CIA gave her false information about enhanced interrogation techniques in a 2002 briefing, Fox News contributor and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich misrepresented a statement by CIA director Leon Panetta, falsely claiming that Panetta said that the "CIA doesn't" lie. Gingrich stated, "I think what Panetta said Friday is very telling. It is illegal to lie to Congress, and the CIA doesn't do it." In fact, as Media Matters for America has noted, the May 15 statement from Panetta stated, "Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress" [emphasis added]. As Politico's White House reporter Josh Gerstein noted in a May 18 post, "Panetta didn't reject or deny ... Pelosi's allegations that she was falsely briefed by the CIA about interrogations. Look carefully at Panetta's statement from Friday, especially the verb tense used. ... Panetta isn't opining on past acts. He's referring to the current policy. He's also not saying it never happens or happened that someone lied to or misled Congress. He's saying the agency as a whole doesn't intend to."
From Panetta's May 15 statement:
There is a long tradition in Washington of making political hay out of our business. It predates my service with this great institution, and it will be around long after I'm gone. But the political debates about interrogation reached a new decibel level yesterday when the CIA was accused of misleading Congress.
Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing "the enhanced techniques that had been employed." Ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened.
My advice -- indeed, my direction -- to you is straightforward: ignore the noise and stay focused on your mission. We have too much work to do to be distracted from our job of protecting this country.
We are an Agency of high integrity, professionalism, and dedication. Our task is to tell it like it is -- even if that's not what people always want to hear. Keep it up. Our national security depends on it.
From the May 20 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:
GINGRICH: What she said Thursday is a stunning, dishonest statement about a major American institution that has a key role in our survival.
DIANE SAWYER (co-host): But, as you know, some people have said that you're doing this for political reasons; it's really a political salvo that you're hurling at her and a kind of double-standard. For instance, Congressman Peter Hoekstra, who was head of the House Intelligence Committee at the time, wrote a letter in which he, on another issue, said this about the CIA: "We cannot have an intelligence community that covers up what it does and then lies to Congress." That's a Republican saying it.
GINGRICH: Yes.
SAWYER: And they're saying, "Where were you then? You didn't call for him to resign."
GINGRICH: Well, I think in that particular [inaudible] he's fighting with them over a particular report he wants -- this is about a year and a half ago. But I've had a similar standard of toughness with Republicans on other issues. For example, Secretary Paulson, when he was -- I thought he was failing as secretary of the Treasury.
SAWYER: So should he be repudiated for those words, too?
GINGRICH: Well, in that case he's writing a specific letter asking them to change something that they were doing.
SAWYER: So --
GINGRICH: He did not say in that letter --
SAWYER: "Lies," he says.
GINGRICH: -- the CIA routinely lies to the Congress.
SAWYER: Well, he says "lies." He says "what it does and then lies to Congress."
GINGRICH: And I think -- I think that they actually had to come back and testify. I think that it's important for Congress to keep the CIA under observation. It's important for them to have the CIA report regularly. But I think what Panetta said Friday is very telling. It is illegal to lie to Congress, and the CIA doesn't do it. And Panetta said it is harming this institution.
He made a speech Monday in which he said this is harming the institution. And I have no sense that -- I mean, I would certainly, if I were a person trying to defend this country, I would have very little confidence that the speaker of the House had any regard for what we were doing, and what we're trying to do to stop terrorism.















We always need to do the math before we take a statement on its surface value ... Does the statement refer to past, present, future, a mix?
These are all unsupported by any information on Gingrich's part. He wasn't there, so why is ABC giving him an open mic? - He said/she said "journalism at its worst.
Oh my achingass...verb tenses...LOL.
Try this one on...and use and "tense" you want:
-- records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed -- Panetta
Yep, Pelosi was in the meeting and they told her what they had done to Zubaydah...just ask Panetta if you want the real deal...ask mmfa if you want spin.
It's one person's parsing against another's unless more evidence is forthcoming.... or are you seriously proposing that the CIA has never lied to Congress?
The simple fact is that Panetta, himself, said that he could not swear to the veracity of the memos regarding the briefing.
And another fact that Gingrich consistently misses is that when Panetta was speaking about the damage doen to the intelligence community, he was referring to the politicalization of this issue - which the Republicans started and continue. It was a rebuke of ANYONE who politicizes the issues, not just Pelosi.
But, since Newt doesn't believe for a minute that his excrement stinks, he can't possibly notice that Panetta was shooting at him, too. The MSM has not mentioned this at all. Those darned, old, nasty liberal media flacks.
Pelosi is the only person in all of this who has consistently asked for a truth commission. She hasn't ducked any of this - she is merely responding to the churlish and political attacks of the right.
You did.
Were you at the meeting?
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/05/source_eit_term_wasnt_in_use_when_pelosi_was_brief.php?ref=fpa
If this madness about torture is winding down, as indeed it seems to be after three weeks at least of near 24 hour 7 day a week obsessive saturation and immersion on cable and elsewhere...
If it's finally winding down, then maybe it's a good time to ask, what was the point of it all?
What constructive thing was accomplished, what goal was achieved, what point was made...
None that I can see... it was just a bunch of neurotic and hysterical noise is all.
I have a theory (true and serious) that watching television is both the cause and the symptom, of a modern day type of neurosis, that otherwise exhibits itself in a chattering and prattling of subject matter picked up from television, stuff like celebrity dance contests and diverse individuals or celebrities living in the same house with a camera following them from room to room, or being stranded on an island, or eating worms, or being fat and trying to lose weight and competing for the title of "The Biggest Loser" (and isn't that funny, using that term like that)...
And as far as people who fancy themselves interested in and informed about National Policy, well they watch those cable television commentary shows, and they prattle on and chatter away in the noise they pick up there, stuff like the President and his wife being celebrities (sharing the same house but not stuck on an island), and stuff about tele-prompters, and of course of late "torture memos" which morphed into "torture briefings" and now seems to be winding down, just like the talk of all neurotics and hysterics eventually winds down and leaves them worn out (but rarely reflective about what it is they were so hysterical about, as they are often just taking a breather while waiting for the next episode of their neurosis)...
Well, it's a theory I have, that watching television is both the cause and the symptom of a kind of modern day neurosis, that like most neuroses, exhibits itself in talking breathlessly in words and sentences that can best be described as 'scatter-brained'...
Scatter Brained : that's what television does to your mind I guess, it scatters your thoughts here and there, to celebrities dancing or living in houses together, to iPods and touching the Queen, to "torture memos" and then "torture briefings" and now onto who knows where...
You know, if people keep watching television like this, the pharmaceutical companies are bound to get in on it, and address the neurosis caused and exhibited by watching too much television, and make a pill and start advertising it... on television.
Parents should watch out too : if their children watch too much television, they're likely to become more scatter-brained than they already naturally are, and are likely to be diagnosed with a neurosis, and prescribed an assortment of pills for the condition or syndrome of dysfunction or however else they'd characterize Attention Deficit Disorder.
Turn it off... that's the cure... see right through it...
There is wellness beyond television, and beyond this noise about "torture memos" and "torture briefings".
documents that purport to prove Congress was briefed and seem to be missing actual times or places on them for the briefings. And a related document says Congressman Porter Goss was briefed but he had become CIA director and left Congress when the document said he was briefed. Another document says that an aide to Congressman Obey was briefed, but the aide says he was kicked out of the room and was never there.
Then there's former Sen.Bob Graham's, careful notes. He was never briefed on 3 days the CIA says he was.
Why haven't other media checked the CIA documents?
I can't believe the hype and hysteria from Newt Gingrich. The media is facilitating him.
The facts are these: 1.) The CIA under Bush did not report torture to Congress until a month after it started using it. This is a violation of the law.
2.) The CIA tortured. This is a violation of the law.
Where is your hysteria concerning torture Newt?
I see some Bush apologists in the media. Dana Bash of CNN.
Commentators on MSNBC like Joe Scarborough. The editor of the Philadephia Inquirer who hired Bush lawyer torture memo writer David Yoo to write a blog.
Bash had stars in her eyes everytime she followed John McCain on the campaign trail. Time for her to become a copy editor in the backroom.
And then there's veteran Pentagon reporter Jim Miklaszewski,who dismissed Robert Draper's GQ article about Rumfeld's biblical cover sheets for Department of Defense briefing papers that went to Bush on a daily basis.
His sources, the same Pentagon pals he has probably had a drink with for years said it didn't happen. Thanks for your thoughtful research, "Mick." Time for you to retire and write a book.
http://thelonggoodbye.wordpress.com/2009/05/16/republicans-blamed-the-cia-now-they-hide-behind-the-cia-and-blame-democrats/
The whole Pelosi "controversy" is a manufactured distraction.
It reminds me of how the Jews were sent to "resettlement camps" or "work camps" in Poland and Germany during world war II (not death camps or concentration camps). We should remember that the Nazis did everything under color of law. What the Nazis did was LEGAL under their system, and everyone who operated within it was "just following orders" (just like those in our CIA who tortured prisoners in Guantanamo, Iraq, and other places...........they were following orders too). But I guess it is okay when we do it because.....uh....we're the GOOD GUYS. Does anyone REALLY believe this ?
We have become a nation of hypocrites (not laws), and should be ashamed of ourselves. It goes way beyond Nancy Pelosi.
why is anyone paying him any attention?
They denied torturing Gitmo and Abu Graib detainees! The CIA is the history of lying, and assassinations and overt corruption of the democratic processes in country after country. They are our KGB and Mossaud (sp?). Read the past - Church Committee, Rocke-
feller hearings and right up to the present. I am still laughing.