On Thu, 7 May 2009 21:14:10 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On May 7, 10:29*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 22:17:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/cap...05/cia_says_pe...

This was in the news many weeks ago. *Her take was that they were
briefed on the methods but were never told the methods were being
used.

I don't know if she asked specifically or those who were briefing her
assumed that she'd make the connection.

I assume she's being purposefully dense in order to keep that teflon
coating intact. *Like a tobacco CEO who doesn't dare acknowledge the
concept of using his products and cancer.

Dude, shes a DEM for gods sake, you maybe expected truth?

Dude, she's a politician. I expect truth from them when it's
expedient which I hope is more often than not. You don't get to be
speaker by telling the truth all the time.

I have my suspicions but will withhold judgment until I see what
evidence they have.

However, I will note that those on the left had their suspicions about
the veracity of Pelosi's claims when Rachael Maddow questioned her in
late February. This wasn't a love-you Cheney/Hannity interview,
Rachael dug right in and asked her very probing questions about what
she knew, when and pressed for detailed responses.

We'll see how well those responses hold up to the latest news.

On May 7, 11:35*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 21:14:10 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch



wrote:
On May 7, 10:29*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 22:17:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/cap...05/cia_says_pe....

This was in the news many weeks ago. *Her take was that they were
briefed on the methods but were never told the methods were being
used.

I don't know if she asked specifically or those who were briefing her
assumed that she'd make the connection.

I assume she's being purposefully dense in order to keep that teflon
coating intact. *Like a tobacco CEO who doesn't dare acknowledge the
concept of using his products and cancer.

Dude, shes a DEM for gods sake, you maybe expected truth?

Dude, she's a politician. *I expect truth from them when it's
expedient which I hope is more often than not. *You don't get to be
speaker by telling the truth all the time.

I have my suspicions but will withhold judgment until I see what
evidence they have. *

However, I will note that those on the left had their suspicions about
the veracity of Pelosi's claims when Rachael Maddow questioned her in
late February. *This wasn't a love-you Cheney/Hannity interview,
Rachael dug right in and asked her very probing questions about what
she knew, when and pressed for detailed responses.

We'll see how well those responses hold up to the latest news.

I'm sure that Rachael would love to *probe* Pelosi much deeper than
asking the Speaker questions.

On Thu, 7 May 2009 22:49:23 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On May 7, 11:35*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 7 May 2009 21:14:10 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch



wrote:
On May 7, 10:29*pm, jps wrote:
On Thu, 07 May 2009 22:17:03 -0400, BAR wrote:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/cap...05/cia_says_pe...

This was in the news many weeks ago. *Her take was that they were
briefed on the methods but were never told the methods were being
used.

I don't know if she asked specifically or those who were briefing her
assumed that she'd make the connection.

I assume she's being purposefully dense in order to keep that teflon
coating intact. *Like a tobacco CEO who doesn't dare acknowledge the
concept of using his products and cancer.

Dude, shes a DEM for gods sake, you maybe expected truth?

Dude, she's a politician. *I expect truth from them when it's
expedient which I hope is more often than not. *You don't get to be
speaker by telling the truth all the time.

I have my suspicions but will withhold judgment until I see what
evidence they have. *

However, I will note that those on the left had their suspicions about
the veracity of Pelosi's claims when Rachael Maddow questioned her in
late February. *This wasn't a love-you Cheney/Hannity interview,
Rachael dug right in and asked her very probing questions about what
she knew, when and pressed for detailed responses.

We'll see how well those responses hold up to the latest news.

I'm sure that Rachael would love to *probe* Pelosi much deeper than
asking the Speaker questions.

Projecting? Do you want to **** every woman you meet? I'm sure
Rachael is far more discriminating than you.