House Intel GOPers React To Dem Letter On Panetta

By
Wednesday, July 08, 2009 at 11:12 pm

I just got reaction from Jamal Ware, spokesman for the Republicans on the House Permanent Select Intelligence Committee, to the letter that seven of their Democratic colleagues issued saying that CIA Director Leon Panetta conceded in recent, closed testimony that CIA had misled Congress since 2001 on torture. Now, I had asked Jamal whether ranking committee Republican Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) had the same recollection as the Dems as to whether Panetta in fact conceded that the CIA misled them. As you’ll see, he went in a different direction:

“It is ironic that President Obama is threatening to veto the Democrat’s intelligence bill because of the flawed notification provision inserted specifically to provide political cover for Speaker Pelosi. This comes on the heels of Democrats continued efforts to attack the CIA to cover the Speaker’s original charge, which despite any claims to the contrary, remains unsubstantiated. The blatantly political nature of the Democrats’ letters is revealed by their handling. One was slipped under a staffer’s office door late at night, the other was deliberately hidden from Republican Members for two weeks and had to be obtained from the press. It is unfortunate that the president’s veto threat and the continued attacks by partisans against the CIA are a direct result of congressional Democrats continued heavy handed attempts to cover up for Speaker Pelosi and what she knew and didn’t do regarding enhanced interrogation.”

Now, given the effort here to keep up the pressure on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for asserting that the CIA misled her on torture, it’s notable that there’s nothing in this statement challenging the Democratic account of Panetta’s concession. The Democratic letter doesn’t menton Pelosi once.

You can follow TWI on Twitter and Facebook.

Follow Spencer Ackerman on Twitter


Comments

2 Comments

sgwhiteinfla
Comment posted July 9, 2009 @ 3:18 am

Sarah Palin would be proud of that non answer answer. Also and you betcha!


Proper_Logical_Debate
Comment posted July 9, 2009 @ 7:07 pm

As I see it there are some questions to be answered:
The CIA must keep Congress informed but who and how much to tell?
Who in Congress has the “need to know” and the “security clearance”?
Those people should be the leadership at least because Congress (along with most everyone) leaks like a sieve.
There is a lack of trust which gave pause and vaged clear statements for fear that too much would get out. When you can't trust your Representative, who can you trust?
It would be interesting to set up a sting by planting false information and seeing if the newspapers print it, but that would subject the planter to the charge of giving false information to Congress. “Excuse me sir but I am going to tell you something that isn't true to see if you tell it to someone while thinking that nobody will detect you.” Won't happen except by a prearranged Presidential Pardon. Won't happen in this administration.

What really happened, I don't know in this he said/she said question of who said what to whom and when. I want dates and quotes. period
'cause I don't trust you.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.