Was Nancy Pelosi the only one who was briefed on CIA torture? Are we supposed to believe that she and she alone is somehow responsible because only she was aware of it? I may be off target here (and please correct me if I am), but it seems like Pelosi would have been briefed as part of the House Permanent Select Committee On Intelligence for the 107th Congress, right? You can get the full roster of the committee from the Library of Congress (it's also posted below).

I have no problem going after anyone who could have stopped our country from systematically violating its own laws and did nothing, but it seems like we're going to need a bigger net. Hypocrisy is certainly disgraceful, but it's not the crime that was committed here.

Republicans

Porter J. Goss, Florida, Chairman

Doug Bereuter, Nebraska

Michael N. Castle, Delaware

Sherwood L. Boehlert, New York

Jim Gibbons, Nevada

Ray LaHood, Illinois

Randy "Duke" Cunningham, California

Peter Hoekstra, Michigan

Richard Burr, North Carolina

Saxby Chambliss, Georgia

Terry Everett, Alabama

J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois, Ex Officio

Democrats

Nancy Pelosi, California, Ranking Democrat

Sanford D. Bishop, Georgia

Jane Harman, California

Gary A. Condit, California

Tim Roemer, Indiana

Silvestre Reyes, Texas

Leonard L. Boswell, Iowa

Collin C. Peterson, Minnesota

Bud Cramer, Alabama

Richard A. Gephardt, Missouri, Ex Officio

That is exactly what the Republicans are asking since the Dem's are asking for prosecutions of Bush officials. The fact is Congress was informed and just like the vote on the war in Iraq they all now seem to be changing the story take Senator Shumer in 2004 for instance:

There are times when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this. I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all, would say, Do what you have to do.

So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal.

Now Ol'Chuck is encouraging prosecutions..........what an asshole. Will the Democrats ever recover there short term memory loss?

Let's air it out already. Seriously, let's get it going. What is the law on this? Who broke it, if anyone? I want the truth. Don't you want the truth?

Yes, let's have an investigation and if prominent dems knew about it and did nothing then let the public know. Same for Republicans. We the people have a right to know what was being done in our name

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—That the President is authorized to use all

necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations,

or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed,

or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,

or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent

any future acts of international terrorism against the United States

by such nations, organizations or persons.

----------------------------

That is the Law, just so you know

Of course she was not the only one to know. But when you throw stones... and she and every other democrat have been throwing stones for 2 years. If we really want a "truth commission", then it needs to go after everyone -- democrat and republican alike. The problem is the democrats only want to go after republicans.

Thanks for this -- I always like posts with actual informational content. But don't you think that "all necessary and appropriate force" still leaves a lot of gray area? The way this clause is worded allows the President to determine who the "nations, organizations, or persons" are, but not what is "necessary and appropriate" to do to them...

Has Pelosi suggested that any probe or inquiry should be limited to Republicans? I haven't seen that anywhere...there is the fact that the Administration and the Congress at the time were both controlled by Republicans, but I haven't interpreted anything I've read to suggest that culpable Democrats are somehow off limits...have you?

BritBailey:

Let's air it out already. Seriously, let's get it going. What is the law on this? Who broke it, if anyone? I want the truth. Don't you want the truth?

We already know the truth - that Democrats and Republicans BOTH knew it was going on, NEITHER side stopped it, and now the Democrats are trying to selectively bash the other party for it. I call BS on the whole thing; it's in the past and is not fixable, wasn't especially pretty but likely saved American lives, and it's time to MOVE ON and address what can be remedied in this country.

CahPahkah:

Thanks for this -- I always like posts with actual informational content. But don't you think that "all necessary and appropriate force" still leaves a lot of gray area?

Laws like this one are intentionally worded to leave gray areas for many reasons. It is not possible to anticipate all the potential uses for the law, so room is left to respond to novel situations. It is vague to protect those who actually carry out the application of the force from future prosecution when the political climate changes (like, uhh, right now...), No one likes the idea of torture (well, no well-adjusted person anyway), but given the choice between a little overly aggressive intelligence gathering and a lot of my countrymen dying, give me the torture. It's a rough world beyond our borders, folks - you need to wake up and realize that there are entire countries that would celebrate gleefully the violent downfall of America, and lots of folks out there who will do whatever they can to make that downfall a reality. I am well within my rights to use LETHAL force to protect myself or my family from imminent danger - does it not seem reasonable that government-sanctioned torture is a similar (but LESS harmful) principle applied on a global scale?

No one is suggesting that Pelosi was the only one briefed. Nor has anyone said no Republicans were briefed. None of that is in dispute.

What is being said is that it is hypocritical to the extreme for Pelosi to be leading the charge to prosecute prior administration officials who knew of or approved these interrogation techniques. She was clearly aware (whether she was personally briefed or told by a staffer is most certainly irrelevant) of the water boarding, etc. and sat quietly and let it happen. To call for others to be jailed for something she herself has done is dishonest and distasteful. If there are to be criminal investigations into the use of these tactics and who knew about it - Pelosi must certainly be included on the list of suspects.

Yes, she has only suggested probing the actions of Republicans. Pelosi has not specifically said Dems can't be prosecuted - but she (meaning the Dems in general) is targeting the past administration only and they're all Republicans. I can imagine no circumstances under which the Democratice Speaker of the House would suggest prosecuting members of her own party. It would be politically damaging.

I do agree that "No one likes the idea of torture", but isn't that why it's illegal?

Where I do not agree is that we should scrap our laws when the going gets rough; if anyone in Congress who supports it were intellectually honest enough to say "Let's legalize torture.", that would be one thing. But what we have here is a range of very emotional post facto rationalizations for what, at the end of the day, was illegal.

I think that "there are entire countries that would celebrate gleefully the violent downfall of America" is a bit of a dramatic overstatement, but yes, we as a nation do have enemies. My point of disagreement here is that we must not give up our character or morality as a country in a desperate, ill-considered (however well-intentioned) bid to save it.

ahabers:

Yes, she has only suggested probing the actions of Republicans. Pelosi has not specifically said Dems can't be prosecuted - but she (meaning the Dems in general) is targeting the past administration only and they're all Republicans. I can imagine no circumstances under which the Democratice Speaker of the House would suggest prosecuting members of her own party. It would be politically damaging.

Then isn't a more honest and useful response to say, "Yes, let's investigate everyone involved!" rather than "You are a hypocrite and so no investigations can go forward!." ?

I fully agree that this could come back to bite Pelosi and other Democrats, but that doesn't mean that nobody should be held accountable, does it?

authorizing torture vs being told it is happening and having no way to stop it are two very different things.