Who is right, Pelosi or Panetta?

[Hear Again]

again - I did not state that I'm using it as fact. I'm merely using someone's quote because he said it better than me. To clarify my stance on blogs - there are a few blogs that carry with significant credibility while many blogs are worthless.

Quoting another just because they say something more eloquently than you could does not substantiate your claim.

 

[Jiro]

How else am I supposed to view what you posted? If you are using it as an example of opinion, again, opinions are not facts. If you're going to cite opinions to back up your assertions, you may as well say nothing at all since that's basically what an opinion amounts to.

which is what I already did in my post #199 and others. You came up with none. Why are you sticking up for her? If she's so against torture and such thing, why is there no record of her objection?

 

[Jiro]

Where's the evidence for that? No one knows for sure if she's been lied to or if she's lying to us.

Why do you keep asking us for evidence when the investigation barely started? The ironic thing is that.... she called for truth finding investigation... and the preliminary finding shows that the report contradicted to her statements.

My best guess is that the investigation will be buried because it will implicate more Democrats. oh well. it's a dirty dirty business out there.

 

[Hear Again]

but you cited 0 so your point is moot. You asked for mine, I came up with it. Now I'm asking for yours.

You did not provide links. I'd like to see proof (i.e. legitimate news articles) that Pelosi did the 3 things you accused her of doing.

 

[Cheri]

Where's the evidence for that? No one knows for sure if she's been lied to or if she's lying to us. .

You're missing my point, it doesn't matter if she is either being lied to or is lying to us. The point is she said in her own words that she had acknowledged that she knew by early 2003 that waterboarding was being used and if that was true, why didn't she said something before during the early 2003 about it-- why now?

 

[Hear Again]

which is what I already did in my post #199 and others. You came up with none. Why are you sticking up for her? If she's so against torture and such thing, why is there no record of her objection?

Who says I'm defending Pelosi? What I object to is her being treated unfairly without just cause or evidence.

 

[Jiro]

You did not provide links. I'd like to see proof (i.e. legitimate news articles) that Pelosi did the 3 things you accused her of.

again - google/newspapers/speeches/etc. are your friend. all you have to do is type in what I just said and you will have dozens of articles and her speeches available for you. Why is it my responsibility to educate you? If you are not aware of it, then it's your job to read up on it.

My opinion on her is based by what I know about her for past 2 years. Like I said - for starter... read her opening speech and then compare it to now. It's full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

 

[Jiro]

Who says I'm defending Pelosi? What I object to is her being treated unfairly without just cause or evidence.

and I object to her serious allegation without evidence. Again - my opinion on her is based on her speeches and actions (which contradicted to each other).

 

[Hear Again]

Like I said - for starter... read her opening speech and then compare it to now. It's full of contradictions and hypocrisy.

So? You can't expect politicians to keep every promise they make. That's not realistic nor is it the way the world of politics works.

 

[Jiro]

So? You can't expect politicians to keep every promise they make. That's not realistic nor is it the way the world of politics works.

At least Obama's doing what he preached. Pelosi didn't. Not a damn thing! Again - if Newt Gingrich can cockblock Bill Clinton, so can Pelosi but she didn't. She just sat behind Bush and spoke softly until Bush was gone.

 

[Hear Again]

and I object to her serious allegation without evidence. Again - my opinion on her is based on her speeches and actions (which contradicted to each other).

Your opinion is based on Pelosi's past actions. With that being the case, it should have no bearing on the article Reba posted since there has been no evidence to prove her guilt.

 

[Hear Again]

At least Obama's doing what he preached. Pelosi didn't. Not a damn thing! Again - if Newt Gingrich can cockblock Bill Clinton, so can Pelosi but she didn't. She just sat behind Bush and spoke softly until Bush was gone.

I find it interesting how you know what Pelosi can and can't do based on Newt Gingrich. Do you know something the rest of us don't?

 

[Jiro]

You're missing my point, it doesn't matter if she is either being lied to or is lying to us. The point is she said in her own words that she had acknowledged that she knew by early 2003 that waterboarding was being used and if that was true, why didn't she said something before during the early 2003 about it-- why now?

exactly!!!!!!!!!!! Do you know why? She didn't want to be painted as unpatriotic which can cause her a job like John Kerry. Now that she's the Speaker of the House..... with Bush gone.... yep why now?

a big fat fact remains - PELOSI - A RANKING MEMBER OF HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE FILED NO FORMAL OBJECTION TO INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES.

 

[Hear Again]

At least Obama's doing what he preached.

I'm going to print out a copy of this post because this is one of the rare instances where you said something positive about Obama. (Remember the 99% figure I mentioned in a previous post? )

 

[Jiro]

I find it interesting how you know what Pelosi can and can't do based on Newt Gingrich. Do you know something the rest of us don't?

yes I do know what Pelosi can do or can't do. It's in the Constitution and history book. Surprised that you didn't know.

info from government site - Role of the Speaker of the House

The Speaker of the House of Representatives is elected by his or her fellow Members to preside over the House. The Speaker typically maintains three roles, as the Representative for his or her district, as a leader of his or her party, and as the leader of the House as a whole. The party that holds a majority of the seats in the House will generally elect a Representative of their own party to serve as Speaker.

As specified in the rules and customs of the House, responsibilities of the Speaker include:

* Calling the House to order.
* Administering the oath of office to House Members.
* Presiding over debate, recognizing Members to speak on the floor, and preserving order; or delegating that power to another Member of Congress.
* Setting the legislative agenda.
* Leading the appointment process for the chairs of the various committees and subcommittees in the House, including conference committees which negotiate final versions of legislation.

The Speaker is also second in the line of succession to the presidency after the Vice President under the Presidential Succession Act of 1947.

On January 4, 2007, Pelosi was elected to serve as Speaker, becoming the first woman, the first Californian, and the first Italian American to hold the position.

Makes you wonder why Pelosi did not use her power to try to stop the interrogation.

 

[Jiro]

I'm going to print out a copy of this post because this is one of the rare instances where you said something positive about Obama. (Remember the 99% figure I mentioned in a previous post? )

lol!!!! He did what he promised (of course some of it I don't agree with). Did Pelosi promise what she preached on her opening speech? Not a damn thing!!!!

 

[Daredevel7]

This is what I think:

Panetta did an hour long Powerpoint presentation talking about the latest updates from the CIA. He talked about numbers, latest technology, latest tactics ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Boring stuff. Then the whole interrogation crap comes up and someone went "PELOSI! You went to that presentation, why didn't you stop it!?" And Pelosi simply said "Wow um, I wasn't really aware.. I heard him saying something about "enhanced techniques", but I thought he was trying to sound cool."

The truth is always in the middle.

 

[Jiro]

This is what I think:

Panetta did an hour long Powerpoint presentation talking about the latest updates from the CIA. He talked about numbers, latest technology, latest tactics ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ. Boring stuff. Then the whole interrogation crap comes up and someone went "PELOSI! You went to that presentation, why didn't you stop it!?" And Pelosi simply said "Wow um, I wasn't really aware.. I heard him saying something about "enhanced techniques", but I thought he was trying to sound cool."

The truth is always in the middle.

then she needs to resign if she's not up for what her job requires her to do.

 

[Jiro]

Your opinion is based on Pelosi's past actions. With that being the case, it should have no bearing on the article Reba posted since there has been no proof to support her guilt.

let's see..... Pelosi's past plus background plus her lousy job as Speaker of the House.... compared to Paneta's.... yep I think I know whose credibility weighs more. again - Pelosi made a serious allegation.

 

[Hear Again]

yes I do know what Pelosi can do or can't do. It's in the Constitution and history book. Surprised that you didn't know.

I don't mean to disappoint you, but I'm well aware of the duties the Speaker of the House performs -- all of which Pelosi has fulfilled.