Grief-giver Scarborough says his "friend" Pelosi "caught a lot of grief" for accusing CIA of lying
SUMMARY: Joe Scarborough said that Nancy Pelosi "caught a lot of grief" over saying the CIA misled her about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques. However, in May, Scarborough had himself accused Pelosi of lying about the issue, calling her allegations a "joke."
In the wake of reports by congressional Democrats that CIA director Leon Panetta has acknowledged to members of Congress that the CIA has misled Congress, MSNBC host Joe Scarborough noted on July 9 that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- whom he called "a friend of mine from Congress" -- "caught a lot of grief" in May for accusing the CIA of misleading her about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques. But Scarborough did not note that he was one of many conservatives attacking Pelosi in May for accusing the CIA of misleading her. Indeed, at the time, Scarborough called Pelosi's allegations a "joke."
On July 9, Scarborough was interviewing Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-CA) about House Intelligence Committee chairman Silvestre Reyes' July 7 letter stating that CIA Director Leon Panetta admitted in a closed hearing that the CIA had not fully informed Congress on other classified matters. Scarborough asked Eshoo whether, in light of Panetta's May 15 statement that it is not the CIA's "policy or practice to mislead Congress," "Pelosi believe[s] that she has been hung out to dry" by Panetta. Scarborough and Eshoo also discussed a letter she and six other members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence sent to Panetta asking whether he would now modify his comments about the CIA's "policy or practice." Noting that the CIA has since reaffirmed Panetta's statement, Scarborough said: "He [Panetta] didn't listen to you, and either the CIA is lying or you're lying, and, of course, I know you're not lying. You're a wonderful person. But there isn't really a gray area here. Leon Panetta is telling you one thing behind closed doors, according to what you're saying here, and another thing publicly. Shouldn't that cause you and Americans concern?" Scarborough later said, "I would like an investigation."
However, on the May 15 edition of Morning Joe, Scarborough attacked Pelosi, stating that she was "lying" and "changing her story." He also said, "You don't accuse the CIA of lying. Especially when they're not lying." Scarborough continued to attack Pelosi on May 18, asserting that in issuing his statement, Panetta had "stepped away from [Pelosi], undercut her, said, 'We don't lie.' " Scarborough also stated that Pelosi had "been caught in a lie, and I think she really, for the sake of herself and her political future -- she needs to shut up."
From the May 15 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: The problem with Nancy here is -- to be really truthful about this -- everybody knows she's lying.
MARK HALPERIN (Time editor-at-large and senior political analyst): And it's not even -- you don't even need more facts. She herself has now changed the story. And the position she's taking -- the position she took yesterday that I think caused the most people to laugh was when she said, "After I realized this was a problem, I decided all I could do was fight for Democratic control of Congress. I no longer could deal with the substance of the issue."
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: So, she lies about waterboarding not going on at the time. And then, of course, the CIA let everybody know that waterboarding had gone on. So her next story was, "Oh, yes, yes, they told my aide." That was the next story. Then she went to the story, "I was so upset, I had [Rep.] Jane Harman [D-CA], my dear, close, personal friend, Jane Harman, who I've tried to kill politically for years, write this letter for me."
HALPERIN: Lent her the stamp, I believe.
SCARBOROUGH: Lent her the stamp. Licked the stamp, put it on the envelope to the CIA.
HALPERIN: Looked up the ZIP plus four.
SCARBOROUGH: Exactly. And then that story didn't wash because it was such a joke. So now she's gone to the next story, which is, the CIA is lying. Which is also a joke, because you talk to any CIA agent or anybody that knows the agency -- they write everything down. So what she has done is not only called the CIA liars, she's called all the other people in the briefings liars, Democrats and Republicans alike who were there, who have said, "This happened."
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: Any Jim Croce fans around the table here?
MIKA BRZEZINSKI (co-host): I like him.
SCARBOROUGH: You know --
HALPERIN: "New York's Not My Home."
SCARBOROUGH: Exactly. And also, you don't tug on Superman's cape, you don't spit in the wind, you don't pull the mask off the old Lone Ranger, and you don't mess around with --
HALPERIN: A-doo-doo-duh-doo-doo-doo.
SCARBOROUGH: -- the CIA. Exactly. The CIA. You don't accuse the CIA of lying. Especially when they're not lying.
HALPERIN: I don't even know what she says they're lying about. That's still not clear to me.
SCARBOROUGH: It's amazing.
BRZEZINSKI: OK. Let's talk to --
SCARBOROUGH: She keeps changing her story.
From the May 18 edition of Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: And, hey, speaking of long, strange trips: Willie Geist, have you ever been busted for lying and recovered as badly as Nancy Pelosi? I mean, seriously.
GEIST (co-host): I've been busted for lying, yes. But I've recovered much better than the speaker has --
BRZEZINSKI: Oh, Willie, because you're cute.
GEIST: -- is what I would say.
BRZEZINSKI: All right. Fine.
SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, and even, you know, Leon Panetta, Mika, Leon Panetta served with Nancy Pelosi, likes Nancy Pelosi. He came out on Friday and really slapped her down. He stepped away from her, undercut her, said, "We don't lie." She had to come out later with a statement praising the Central Intelligence Agency --
BRZEZINSKI: Oh, my God.
SCARBOROUGH: -- somehow trying to blame this on George Bush, who, last time I checked, was not in the briefing room on September 4th, 2002. She's been caught in a lie, and I think she really, for the sake of herself and her political future -- she needs to shut up --
BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.
SCARBOROUGH: -- and say, "I've said all I'm going to say, and I've got nothing else to say."
From the July 9 edition of Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: OK, give us the background here, because when the news first came out, we heard that Leon Panetta had said that the CIA lied, and now is it -- do I understand it right that you all heard testimony behind closed doors where he admitted that the CIA had misled America?
ESHOO: Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, came up to the Hill to a closed session of the House Intelligence Committee to inform us that a program, which I can't discuss, obviously, had been in operation from 2001 until the day before he came to meet with us and he had ended -- he had ended that program. He was there to tell us that no member of Congress had ever been informed. And so the committee was actually stunned --
SCARBOROUGH: Hey, I'm sorry, Anna. Had been informed --
ESHOO: -- when he gave this information.
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: OK. So, Leon Panetta, of course, has told us before, and we could read the written statement, but you know it, that the CIA doesn't lie; it's not the practice of the CIA to lie. And because of that, obviously, Nancy Pelosi caught a lot of grief -- a friend of yours and a friend of mine from Congress. Does Nancy Pelosi believe that she has been hung out to dry by Leon Panetta?
[...]
SCARBOROUGH: But the one thing that I would guess we both agree on is that Congress has to constantly be informed, at least the Select Committee on Intel. We are in agreement there. So, if, in fact, Congress was lied to, that should concern all Americans.
ESHOO: Absolutely.
SCARBOROUGH: Isn't this important enough -- if you have a CIA director who's saying one thing publicly but telling you something else privately -- isn't this an important enough issue for the president of the United States to step in and declassify this information so we can get the truth?
[...]
ESHOO: The members that signed the letter -- and I don't think anyone on the committee would say that he was lying to us. What he did say on May 15th was -- is that the CIA does not mislead the Congress, that it is against their laws and their values, and that's why we wrote to him -- seven members of the committee -- and said, "We think that you should restate publicly and say that this statement no longer stands." It really doesn't stand.
SCARBOROUGH: Well, but that's what they did today, though, and they said that it is not the position or -- nor is it our practice to mislead Congress, so you have a conflict today. He didn't listen to you, and either the CIA is lying or you're lying, and, of course, I know you're not lying. You're a wonderful person. But there isn't really a gray area here. Leon Panetta is telling you one thing behind closed doors, according to what you're saying here, and another thing publicly. Shouldn't that cause you and Americans concern?
ESHOO: Well, it is of deep concern because this is so serious. But what I would say -- what I would say to my children when they were small was that little people make little mistakes, big people make little mistakes. We know mistakes have been made. This is a grievous one. This is as serious as they come. Now, why the CIA is sticking to the same quote over and over again, I don't really think is -- I think it's totally inappropriate. But they're going to stick to their line. It's not so. And that's -- I think it warrants an investigation of the full committee.
SCARBOROUGH: I would like an investigation.
Huh? How is Joe able to breath is he's this dumb. The CIA consists of PROFESSIONAL liars. If they lie to congress, who won't they lie to.
There is a simple fix for this. From now on, 'national security' cannot be asserted, by any administration, over illegal actions. High ranking officials with knowledge of things like torture or other illegal activities could then bring them to the public's attention as soon as they are discovered to be going on. If there was some argument over whether or not the action was 'legal', then simply let the legal system try the case.
At PolitiFact, we normally would be reluctant to make a Truth-O-Meter ruling in a he-said, she-said situation, but in this case, the evidence goes beyond the competing accounts from Pelosi and Goss. We are persuaded by the CIA timeline, which the agency says is based on "an extensive review of (the CIA's) electronic and hard copy files."
It's also important to note that the timeline that contradicts Pelosi was put together at the behest of an administration controlled by her own party. That document provides compelling — albeit sparsely worded — evidence that Pelosi's recollection is incorrect.
Where as Paneta said the CIA "had not fully informed Congress on other classified matters." it does not say that they had not fully informed Pelosi on the EITs.
Having watched Pelosi through that ordeal it is evident that she is not so skilled squirming out of a lie. Whatever little credibility she had, she gave away with this episode.
PolitiFact. That's the site of a guy who appears on Morning Joe all the time. His Truth-O-Meter never made a ruling Joe didn't like. What does that tell you?
Politifact revisits this issue and at least changes the status from "false" to "unknown" and I will be happy with them.
What you are missing is that Panetta disputed Pelosi's account and only later tried to back out of it by saying the CIA was not truthful. At the very least someone, either the CIA or Pelosi, is lying about very important National Security matters.
What is interesting to me is that the Democrats blocked a a call for an investigation to try to find out the truth.
You would think that the Democrats and everyone here who called for investigation after investigation during the Bush years would be consistent.
Actions speak louder than words sometimes.
To bring up some supposed investigation block is rather obviously a moot point.
It is obvious that Panetta is backtracking and throwing the CIA under the bus in order to salvage what little is left of Pelosi's position.
Pelosi is at best willfully ignorant or at worst, deceitful and putting political gain ahead of national interests. But nothing new there. We've known it all along that the Dems voted for the War in Iraq and then claimed to be stupid so they could attack Bush.
I think Pinetta was pretty new to the job and wanted to show some loyalty to his situation until he saw irrefutable evidence that his agency had done wrong.
To me, Pinetta is taking a brave stand. One of integrity. No doubt the conservatives have already begun to nonsensically question his motives.
So, let me get this straight. The Director of the CIA "is throwing the CIA under the bus to salvage what is left of Pelosi's position", eh?
Pelosi is vindicated by this. Cheney is further implicated by it for continually throwing the Constitution under the bush bus.
Bush didn't just lie to the Dems about Iraq, he lied to the whole damned world about it.
So, you simply either don't know what the hell you're talkin' about, you're lyin' your sorry, shrub-shillin' butt off or both.
My money is on door number three.
Always a pleasure.
It is by far the most shameful mistake I have seen them make. They need to correct it.
How stupid can a nation become with all this nonsensical, fake, juvenile, outrage aboout all the wrong things? How long can we continue to let the 20% of this country that fakes outrage at every political opportunity, that believes that the media is liberally biased, that believes the Earth is 6000 years old, that believes that you can cut taxes and increase spending without driving up a deficit, that believes we only need social welfare because people are lazy, that believes that bailouts are socialism, that believed that a man raised in the finest neighborhoods and schools along the Eastern seabord, that was a male cheerleader in Andover was a cowboy/rancher from Texas continue to control the debate in this country? Why do we cater to the morons? To the least substantive thinkers. There are real men of real intelligence on the conservative side - they just have no place in the modern Republican party.
I say we should be MORE elite. I WANT the intelligent and the elite running my country. Let the small minds worry about who is winning the NASCAR circuit. Let them debate whether or not they should be outraged at Blue Collar Comedy getting cancelled. Or how old Taylor Swift is now.
How did words like elite and progressive become bad things? Because we are letting the kids in the short bus have a side in the argument as if their side is legitimate. It is not. Pat them on the head, tell them "attaboy", give them some more paste to snack on, and go on with the dialogue with the other adults. These people are not worth including in the political discourse and they have nothing of substance to add to it.
They have killed my Republican party and, frankly, they can have it. Let's begin to have actual dialogue between actual conservatives, actual libertarians, and progressives and liberals. Let us see if we can actually find some arguments of substance about actual issues of substance and maybe some real solutions instead of wasting our time listening to people who think that Rush and Hannity and Beck and O'Reilly are "looking out for them". They are fun to argue with and laugh at, but we can no longer afford to allow them to control the debate.
If the Republicans are so incensed by torture, then why isn't Congress going after the people who did it, and the people who ordered it? And it's not like the Dems [or the President] need a super-majority to order investigations. At most, they'd need 1 Republican on a committee to vote their way.
What Pelosi knew and when she knew it is totally incidental. If the Pelosi thing were part of a sweeping probe of everyone, then I'd actually care.
This is all smoke and mirrors.
Cheney Is Linked to C.I.A. Concealment of Terror Program
The Central Intelligence Agency withheld information about a
secret counterterrorism program from Congress for eight years
on direct orders from former Vice President Dick Cheney, the
agency's director, Leon E. Panetta, has told the Senate and
House intelligence committees, two people with direct
knowledge of the matter said Saturday.
The report that Mr. Cheney was behind the decision to conceal
the still-unidentified program from Congress deepened the
mystery surrounding it, suggesting that the Bush
administration had put a high priority on the program and its
secrecy.
Mr. Panetta, who ended the program when he first learned of
its existence from subordinates on June 23, briefed the two
intelligence committees about it in separate closed sessions
the next day.
But I can guess what the wingnuts will say "It's from the NYT a "liberal" newspaper. Cripes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheney Is Linked to C.I.A. Concealment of Terror Program
The Central Intelligence Agency withheld information about a
secret counterterrorism program from Congress for eight years
on direct orders from former Vice President Dick Cheney, the
agency's director, Leon E. Panetta, has told the Senate and
House intelligence committees, two people with direct
knowledge of the matter said Saturday.
The report that Mr. Cheney was behind the decision to conceal
the still-unidentified program from Congress deepened the
mystery surrounding it, suggesting that the Bush
administration had put a high priority on the program and its
secrecy.
Mr. Panetta, who ended the program when he first learned of
its existence from subordinates on June 23, briefed the two
intelligence committees about it in separate closed sessions
the next day.
But I can guess what the wingnuts will say "It's from the NYT a "liberal" newspaper. Cripes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!