Question(s) of the Day

Filed in National by on May 18, 2009

Why is the press focusing more on what Nancy Pelosi might or might not have been briefed on than on what war criminals Cheney, Bush, and their malodorous malefactors might or might not have done when it comes to torture?

And, what will it take for the press to focus on what now appear to be war crimes carried out at the highest level of the United States government? Crimes that dwarf anything that happened during Watergate, where there were no casualties born out of a military conflict initiated under false pretenses. Crimes that dwarf any other crimes committed by government officials in this country’s history.

In the past week, the link between Cheney, torture, and the desperate attempt to find some link, regardless of how tenuous, to Iraq, has been firmly established. Former military and civilian officials have begun to fill in all the blanks. Yet, you can turn on CNN, and what passes for the press is chasing something about Pelosi that both Newt and the CIA threw out there. After all, what ulterior motives could they possibly have?

Seriously, the Beast Who Slumbers knows that DL is visited by current and former journalists, and that some of them comment here. 

He asks them, and everyone else, what can be done to give this story the context it deserves, and what role will the press play to help wash these stains off of our country’s tarnished reputation?

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

Comments (21)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anonone says:

    Are you seriously asking this question or just being snarky?

  2. Jason Z says:

    Pelosi is one of the loudest, and clearly the most powerful, voices calling for the “Truth Commission” to investigate supposed lying done by the former administration. She is now calling the CIA a bunch of liars and with them she’s kicked a hornet’s nest. No one would have dug into these details had she not made false claims about being out of the loop. As ranking member of the Intelligence Commitee in the minority party she was responsible for oversight or the administration. If she knew about waterbaording and thought it was torture, she should have spoke out. If she knew about waterboarding and didn’t think it was torture, she’s in bed with those she now wants to investigate. If she didn’t know about any of this, she’s a fool and should try grandmothering full-time.

  3. Delaware Dem says:

    Jason Z, I think you miss the point.

    Republicans have fallen into a trap here. Yes, she has been one of the loudest voices for an investigation. And because of that, Republicans hoped to silence her with accusations of her own hypocrisy. That didn’t work. She went out there and defended herself, and said the CIA lied to her. And she was backed up by Former Senator Bob Graham, who was on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

    Republicans are now calling for her to produce evidence to back up her claims! I think Pelosi doesn’t give a rat’s ass about an investigation implicating what she knew or didn’t know. She just wants one, and now she has tricked the Republicans into calling for one.

    Hahaha. You thugs are idiots.

  4. Rebecca says:

    I don’t watch cable news, the slant just makes me see red. But there are two big consumers of cable news living in my household and occasionally I get glimpse of how truly venal the networks are.

    Mom and Dad and I were talking yesterday and they were all about how Nancy Pelosi had really screwed up. Not a single mention of torture, just that Nancy had really screwed up.

    Thank you Wolf Blitzer and George Snufflelumpagus.

  5. I think the reason that the Pelosi story has gotten big is that journos are brainwashed into the brand of “he said, she said” journalism, and this story is perfect for that. You see it when they deign to cover the real allegations “enhanced interrogation which some call torture.”

    I think Del Dem is right that Republicans have fallen into a trap of their own making. Porter Goss was clearly trying to warn Pelosi that he could take her down, too. However the slow leaks of information only make an investigation more likely. Plus, since it’s coming out a little at a time, it’s going to stay in the news for a long time. And the longer they talk about it, the more Dick Cheney goes on TV.

    People are working on this story. It will come out. I just wonder when the journos are going to realize that Republicans are arguing that torture is o.k. but it’s wrong of Pelosi not to report it at the very same time. I’d love to see one of them do a gotcha question on a torture apologist/Pelosi basher.

  6. Anonone, are you saying that the war crimes committed by this Administration are not worthy of investigation and prosecution?

    Are you saying that the press isn’t exercising quite a bit of CYA in (a) pushing the meme that the public is tired of this and doesn’t want this investigated (as if that stopped Ken Starr, and as if the media didn’t eat that up)?

    Are you saying that the Nancy Pelosi story cooked up in Newt’s lab w/CIA cooperation is somehow proximately equivalent to torturing people to come up with a rationale for war?

    Or, are you just asking if it’s a rhetorical question? The Beast Who Slumbers believes that the MSM is pushing the ‘people are bored with this story’ meme b/c of their complicity in simply writing what the Bush Administration was showing and what little they got to see.

    That’s why he seriously wants to hear from journalists, and he knows that some lurk and comment here, on their perspective.

    Sorry, anonone, you just hit one of ‘bulo’s hot buttons. He didn’t mean to come at you full-throttle.

  7. Jason Z says:

    I don’t welcome another big taxpayer money wasting investigation; but I also think it will be very harmful to the Obama Administration politically. No one wants this investigation in D.C., Pelosi might just force it here and that’s bad for the party in power.

  8. liberalgeek says:

    Please… do you remember the investigation into a real estate transaction and a blowjob? That was important and deciding whether or not the President ordered an illegal action and/or the CIA lied to Congress and/or whether or not the Speakers of the House knew and approved of the activity is bad.

    Honestly, you have screwed up priorities.

  9. Why is the press focusing more on what Nancy Pelosi might or might not have been briefed on than on what war criminals Cheney, Bush, and their malodorous malefactors might or might not have done when it comes to torture?

    Pretty simple, the country remained safe and Ms Pelosi remains clueless.

    I hope the Dems stupidly have a full blown press hoopla invetsigation. The public will remember a country which was safe while Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan destroy Obama’s Presidency.

    In the meantime Obama is hedging on Gitmo, still allowing rendition and flip flops on every national security policy he ran on.

    The man is on over his head and I am sure Prime Minister Netanyahu is schooling him today.

    Mike Protack

  10. anonone says:

    El ‘Bulo,

    If you realized that the corporate-media is run by repub-worshipping villagers who view Democrats as nuisances unworthy to be sharing the sidewalks with, then you’d understand the answer to your question without having to ask it.

    If the Clinton administration had perpetrated these crimes, I guarantee you that we would have seen them hanging outside the capital as the Bush, Delay, Gingrich and the rest of the repubs lined up for photo-ops in front of the fetid corpses.

    Anybody who doesn’t think that Attorney General Ashcroft would NOT have prosecuted these crimes if they were Dems is nuts. That Obama and Holder won’t is criminal and just more cover-up.

    I also think that it is in Obama’s raw political interests to lessen Pelosi’s political capital, so that is why you don’t see much push back against Gingrich from them.

  11. Jason Z says:

    lg, my point stands, that investigation was bad for the party in (although shared at the time)power. The Dems didn’t get out of the wilderness for around 8-10 yrs.

    And yes, money was wasted in that investigation. I did think it was a worthwhile endeavour, but the federal govt. wastes money everyday it wakes up.

    This investigation is gonna target Repubs who are out of public service and burn Dems who are sitting in elected positions. Investigate away, I’ll see you in 2010.

  12. anonone says:

    the country remained safe

    Except for 9/11, the only attack on America since Pearl Harbor. So every other administration actually kept us safer than yours…

    Never mind. You’re really just too unbelievably irrational to engage in a discussion.

  13. hey protack? wasn’t the country attacked while W was in office? How did we remain safe?

  14. Jason Z says:

    Would you equate FDR to Bush then? He was in office for eight years before Pearl Harbor, Bush was in for 8 months.

  15. cassandra_m says:

    And let’s be really clear what all of the threads are pointing to right now — that Dick Cheney authorized torture of detainees to gin up an excuse to invade Iraq. Not to keep anyone safe.

    You can see this in the testimony of the FBI agent last week, in multiple documents that have been released about what happened in the torture sessions AND the timeline. They did all of this waterboarding even before they briefed Congress. Add to that that they stopped around 2005. So if it was so successful and so vital to our safety, you’d think they’d keep it up.

    Dick and Liz are out trying to convince the press of Dick’s innocence here and the press can’t get off of what Nancy Pelosi knew.

  16. Well, Z-master, Bush was warned about it, but chose to ignore it. And one would guess that there have been some intelligence improvements from the time of Pearl Harbor ’til now, but it doesn’t matter if the President doesn’t care.

    And just how safe did Bush keep the country anyway? A great American city was lost on his watch. His Department of Homeland Security, created expressly to keep the homeland safe, was a disaster.

    And Donald Rumsfeld was more concerned with winning a turf war than saving lives by sending rescue helicopters.

    Really, Z, if you’re gonna eat with the big dogs, at least bring some well-marbled Smitty to the table.

  17. anonone says:

    Would you equate FDR to Bush then?

    HA HA. Jason Z makes a funny.

  18. Good point, Cassandra. If torture kept us so safe, why did they stop? Were they wishing for an attack?

    Z. – don’t you see how stupid that is?

    As far as Bush “keeping us safe” – he ignored warnings about 9/11. “You’ve covered your ass now,” remember that one? He didn’t care, he was following the “anything but Clinton” model at the time and Clinton’s people were worried about al Qaeda. Bush let bin Laden escape at Tora Bora and started a war with a country who didn’t have weapons and didn’t attack us.

    I know somehow the Anthrax attacks went down the memory hole, but those happened under his watch as well.

    As ‘Bulo reminded us – Bush ate birthday cake with John McCain rather than help the people of New Orleans. It’s funny how Bush jetted back from vacation to sign that Terri Schiavo bill, but couldn’t be bothered to pay attention for 3 days to New Orleans. Letting people drown on your watch is not “keeping us safe.”

  19. Geezer says:

    The clamor for investigations comes not from Democrats in office, but from the citizenry. It will not go away until an investigation, preferably a bi- or non-partisan one, is undertaken.

    Mike Protack: Always wrong, never in doubt.

  20. 8 months in office. how long of a learning curve does W get

  21. Eight months longer than Obama. Remember, kids, according to Limbaugh, the ‘Obama Recession’ started before he was even sworn in.