On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:


She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were
and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.

Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred.

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

I had no idea you were in the room. You know everything.

On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:33:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:41:51 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"jim7856" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Disguised as your Speaker of the House, the Master Chef is stirring up
more pudding.

I believe it would be wise for your President-elect to stuff the mummy
back into the coffin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYwZa8jvNp4
Fun to watch them dancing over hot coals. It's amazing how so many liars
thieves and crazys have slithered into high government positions.\\


A couple of things stand out in my mind as I watch and listen to this now
famous Pelosi news conference.

In her statement, she talks about a signed oath she took not to divulge
information she may received during classified briefings. She states that
she has always honored that obligation. Then, she goes on to discuss
information provided during the subject briefing in an attempt to cover her
ass.
She was not free to divulge. Now that information has made it to
public light otherwise, she's no longer bound to hold secret what's in
the public domain.

You must have dealt with this 100 times in the tech industry. It's
called a NDA. When the information is publicly available, you're no
longer bound.
My briefings on variously classified material and subjects while working
for the government and serving in the military did not have a clause
that stated I could talk about what I was told during the briefings if
the material was also disclosed in the public domain.

The second stand-out. She states several times that her job was to elect a
new president who did not subscribe to policies under the Bush
administration. She seems to gloat and be very proud of her accomplishment
in doing so.
They attempted to clarify Bush's torture policy as illegal and he
vetoed the bill. It could not be overridden since Republicans
supported the torture policies of the Bush Administration.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

The only way out is to elect a new president with a different view of
torture. As an American, I'm glad she did what she could.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be elected
with or without her involvement or position in Congress. Bush's time was
over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were and are on record has
opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

She really doesn't serve the Democratic Party very well. She serves
herself.
Who can you cite within the Republican party that serves the party
well?
Palin.

Lame answers. You weren't a US Senator hearing legal arguments
surrounding torture.

No, I was hearing about our military capabilities vs. the Soviets and
ChiComs.

Briefed by the CIA at the cutting edge of government policy and
constitutional/international law torture?

You weren't in the briefings and have no authority from which to
speak.

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:33:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:41:51 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"jim7856" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Disguised as your Speaker of the House, the Master Chef is stirring up
more pudding.

I believe it would be wise for your President-elect to stuff the mummy
back into the coffin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYwZa8jvNp4
Fun to watch them dancing over hot coals. It's amazing how so many liars
thieves and crazys have slithered into high government positions.\\

A couple of things stand out in my mind as I watch and listen to this now
famous Pelosi news conference.

In her statement, she talks about a signed oath she took not to divulge
information she may received during classified briefings. She states that
she has always honored that obligation. Then, she goes on to discuss
information provided during the subject briefing in an attempt to cover her
ass.
She was not free to divulge. Now that information has made it to
public light otherwise, she's no longer bound to hold secret what's in
the public domain.

You must have dealt with this 100 times in the tech industry. It's
called a NDA. When the information is publicly available, you're no
longer bound.
My briefings on variously classified material and subjects while working
for the government and serving in the military did not have a clause
that stated I could talk about what I was told during the briefings if
the material was also disclosed in the public domain.

The second stand-out. She states several times that her job was to elect a
new president who did not subscribe to policies under the Bush
administration. She seems to gloat and be very proud of her accomplishment
in doing so.
They attempted to clarify Bush's torture policy as illegal and he
vetoed the bill. It could not be overridden since Republicans
supported the torture policies of the Bush Administration.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

The only way out is to elect a new president with a different view of
torture. As an American, I'm glad she did what she could.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be elected
with or without her involvement or position in Congress. Bush's time was
over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were and are on record has
opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

She really doesn't serve the Democratic Party very well. She serves
herself.
Who can you cite within the Republican party that serves the party
well?
Palin.
Lame answers. You weren't a US Senator hearing legal arguments
surrounding torture.
No, I was hearing about our military capabilities vs. the Soviets and
ChiComs.

Briefed by the CIA at the cutting edge of government policy and
constitutional/international law torture?

You weren't in the briefings and have no authority from which to
speak.

You've never received briefings on classified material. You have no idea
what is said and how it is said. Any knowledge about classified
briefings on your part is hearsay.

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:


She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were
and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.
Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.
Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred.

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

I had no idea you were in the room. You know everything.

Pelosi has dug a hole so deep she cannot climb out of it.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-05-16.html

You should do a better job of keeping up with current events with issues
you are attempting to discuss.

On May 15, 12:11*am, wrote:
Disguised as your Speaker of the House, the Master Chef is stirring up
more pudding.

I believe it would be wise for your President-elect to stuff the mummy
back into the coffin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYwZa8jvNp4

Well, now that you've mentioned that. ...

i thought the last lines of the article were probably fitting.

"That’s why it's only a matter of time before the president dispenses
some hearty advice to Pelosi.

"Shut up and eat your waffle, Nancy."

http://www.startribune.com/yourvoice...aPc:_Yyc :aUU

On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:09:18 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:


She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were
and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.
Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.
Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred.

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

I had no idea you were in the room. You know everything.

Pelosi has dug a hole so deep she cannot climb out of it.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...009-05-16.html

You should do a better job of keeping up with current events with issues
you are attempting to discuss.

Oh, you weren't in the room?

On Sat, 16 May 2009 14:06:56 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:33:31 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 06:41:51 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

"jim7856" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Disguised as your Speaker of the House, the Master Chef is stirring up
more pudding.

I believe it would be wise for your President-elect to stuff the mummy
back into the coffin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYwZa8jvNp4
Fun to watch them dancing over hot coals. It's amazing how so many liars
thieves and crazys have slithered into high government positions.\\

A couple of things stand out in my mind as I watch and listen to this now
famous Pelosi news conference.

In her statement, she talks about a signed oath she took not to divulge
information she may received during classified briefings. She states that
she has always honored that obligation. Then, she goes on to discuss
information provided during the subject briefing in an attempt to cover her
ass.
She was not free to divulge. Now that information has made it to
public light otherwise, she's no longer bound to hold secret what's in
the public domain.

You must have dealt with this 100 times in the tech industry. It's
called a NDA. When the information is publicly available, you're no
longer bound.
My briefings on variously classified material and subjects while working
for the government and serving in the military did not have a clause
that stated I could talk about what I was told during the briefings if
the material was also disclosed in the public domain.

The second stand-out. She states several times that her job was to elect a
new president who did not subscribe to policies under the Bush
administration. She seems to gloat and be very proud of her accomplishment
in doing so.
They attempted to clarify Bush's torture policy as illegal and he
vetoed the bill. It could not be overridden since Republicans
supported the torture policies of the Bush Administration.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

The only way out is to elect a new president with a different view of
torture. As an American, I'm glad she did what she could.
The framers came up with a system of government that worked. Smart guys.

She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be elected
with or without her involvement or position in Congress. Bush's time was
over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain were and are on record has
opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

She really doesn't serve the Democratic Party very well. She serves
herself.
Who can you cite within the Republican party that serves the party
well?
Palin.
Lame answers. You weren't a US Senator hearing legal arguments
surrounding torture.
No, I was hearing about our military capabilities vs. the Soviets and
ChiComs.

Briefed by the CIA at the cutting edge of government policy and
constitutional/international law torture?

You weren't in the briefings and have no authority from which to
speak.

You've never received briefings on classified material. You have no idea
what is said and how it is said. Any knowledge about classified
briefings on your part is hearsay.

And how would you know that?

Any attempt by you to make sense is hilarious.

On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:


She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain
were and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.

Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred.

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Pelosi's veracity. She is a
politician, after all, but this particular point, about Obama and McCain
both being against torture, doesn't pin her in a lie.

Pelosi is a lightweight, and now damaged, but I don't see this bringing
her down, way too much wiggle room in her statements. There is also
danger for the Republicans trying to pin this on her. There weren't only
Democrats at that briefing. If Pelosi knew about torture, many in the
Republican leadership did also.

On Sat, 16 May 2009 16:23:19 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:


She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. Both candidates .... Obama and McCain
were and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.

Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred.

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Pelosi's veracity. She is a
politician, after all, but this particular point, about Obama and McCain
both being against torture, doesn't pin her in a lie.

Pelosi is a lightweight, and now damaged, but I don't see this bringing
her down, way too much wiggle room in her statements. There is also
danger for the Republicans trying to pin this on her. There weren't only
Democrats at that briefing. If Pelosi knew about torture, many in the
Republican leadership did also.

Oh, no, no, no. There were only D's in the room when they said "we're
doing this method of torture."

Don't you find it odd that no one else supposedly in those meetings
has said definitively that they announced they were using those
methods they were describing?

Was it a wink and a nod? The way Pelosi explains it, they were
breifing them on what they thought were legal tactics, not confirming
their use.

On May 16, 4:51*pm, jps wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 16:23:19 -0500, thunder
wrote:



On Sat, 16 May 2009 13:31:57 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Sat, 16 May 2009 09:23:58 -0400, BAR wrote:

She seems to ignore the fact that a new president was going to be
elected with or without her involvement or position in Congress.
Bush's time was over. * *Both candidates .... Obama *and McCain
were and are on record has opposing torture.
That's a good point.
Its a very good point that is completely lost on the fourth estate.

Except think timeline, the briefing meeting was back in 2003. *Any work
to get Kerry elected failed, and, for the next 4 years, no one knew who
the 2008 candidates were going to be.

Except that Pelosi's comments today cannot be verified to have occurred
in 2003. Pelosi is trying to rewrite history but, she fails to
understand that the events she is attempting to rewrite never occurred..

Pelosi is now backtracking on her accusation that the CIA lied to her
and congress. I guess she didn't listen when she told her children that
honesty was the best policy. Or, she may not have told her children that
honesty was the best policy.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Pelosi's veracity. *She is a
politician, after all, but this particular point, about Obama and McCain
both being against torture, doesn't pin her in a lie. *

Pelosi is a lightweight, and now damaged, but I don't see this bringing
her down, way too much wiggle room in her statements. *There is also
danger for the Republicans trying to pin this on her. *There weren't only
Democrats at that briefing. *If Pelosi knew about torture, many in the
Republican leadership did also. *

Oh, no, no, no. *There were only D's in the room when they said "we're
doing this method of torture."

Don't you find it odd that no one else supposedly in those meetings
has said definitively that they announced they were using those
methods they were describing?

Was it a wink and a nod? *The way Pelosi explains it, they were
breifing them on what they thought were legal tactics, not confirming
their use.

the way that Pelosi explains it?

Er.... which way and which time?