Ed Schultz on Liz Cheney attempting to defend her daddy on morning joe (Video)

Here is is Liz Cheney on morning joe

Home Page

CIA Director Leon Panetta confirms that CIA misled congress (Video)

Are we shocked here? Shocked that the CIA lies??? Oh, yeah, only the Republicans are shocked, since they said that the CIA would NEVER mislead congress!! From Keith Olbermann and h/t to jazmen8 over @ Daily Kos

Source

Home Page

CIA Director Panetta denounces Speaker Pelosi's claims

The "he say, she say", drama continues....

CIA Director Leon Panetta today rejected House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's charge that the agency misled her in 2002 about its use of waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods on suspected terrorists.

Panetta, who took office as President Obama's CIA chief in February, reasserted the agency's claim that it told congressional leaders about the use of such methods during a closed-door briefing in September 2002. Pelosi (D-Calif.) has acknowledged attending the briefing but says she was told only that the CIA was considering the use of waterboarding, or simulated drowning.

"It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress," Panetta said in a message released today to agency employees. A copy was obtained by The Washington Post.

"Our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of [suspected terrorist] Abu Zubaida, describing the 'enhanced techniques that had been employed,' " Panetta said.

A two-year dispute over what Congress was told about the CIA's interrogations reignited yesterday when Pelosi accused the agency and Bush administration of deceiving lawmakers about the interrogation practices. read more here....

Home Page

Leon Panetta confirmed as CIA Director

Finally.

The Senate confirmed Leon Panetta as director of the CIA on Thursday, placing the nation's top spy agency in the hands of a government veteran valued for his skills as a lawmaker and policy manager rather than an expert at intelligence-gathering and analysis.

The Senate approved President Barack Obama's choice on a voice vote. On Wednesday, the Senate Intelligence Committee sent Panetta's nomination to the full chamber without opposition.

During two days of confirmation hearings last week, Panetta told senators that the Obama administration would not prosecute CIA officers who participated in harsh interrogations even if they constituted torture as long as they did not go beyond their instructions. However, he would not say whether charges would be sought against those who authorized the treatment.

Panetta also said that the Obama administration would continue to transfer foreign detainees to other countries for questioning but only if U.S. officials are confident that the prisoners will not be tortured. Some former prisoners have claimed that they were tortured after the Bush administration handed them over to other countries, a transfer process known as "extraordinary rendition."

"We can protect this country, we can get the information we need, we can provide for the security of the American people and we can abide by the law," he told senators. "I'm absolutely convinced that we can do that."

Besides pledging not to interfere in the CIA's day-to-day intelligence operations, Panetta said he would keep on Deputy Director Steven Kappes and three other top officials at the spy agency. He also said he would encourage differing opinions within the agency and would brief the full House and Senate intelligence committees as much as possible, not just their top members. read more here

Home Page

Leon Panetta's Opening Statement, Confirmation for CIA Director (Video)

Home Page

Obama press conference, taps Blair, Panetta to head Intelligence (CIA) - Video, Transcript

First, Obama talks about the 7.2 unemployment rise in this country.

Transcript

Home Page

The Fight with Dianne Feinstein

There is much conventional wisdom being tossed around today about the comments or anger of Senator Dianne Feinstein not being consulted about the choice of Leon Panetta to head the CIA by Obama.

There are those who state not informing her was political poison, but maybe Obama did not want to inform her because it would have been leaked out and shot down before Obama could compose a press release. Maybe not forming her was intentional.

Feinstein, along with Senator Jay Rockefeller are now out in the open criticizing this choice, which gives the Republicans ammunition to criticize Obama for choosing Panetta instead of someone inside the agency.

My take, Barack Obama want a complete cut from the Bush Administration by this choice. Remember Dianne Feinstein and Jay Rockefeller was lock step with the Bush Administration with regards to intelligence. They definitely were not in the front rows at protesting against the use of torture.

Obama is sending an unequivocal message that controversial administration policies approving harsh interrogations, waterboarding and extraordinary renditions _ the secret transfer of prisoners to other governments with a history of torture _ and warrantless wiretapping are over, said several officials.

On the record, Feinstein has stated she would prefer Steve Kappes, this is fine and good but the decision is for Barack Obama. This from Glen Greenwald:

Few things could reflect better on Panetta's selection than the fact that Feinstein and Rockefeller -- two of the most Bush-enabling Senators -- are unhappy with it.

Bush enabling senators. Yes, that sums it up about Feinstein and Rockefeller. They have been in LOCK STEP with Bush; there is no denial about that. That is their record on intelligence.

But John Aravosis has another take on this matter:

First, a word about Difi, Rockefeller and Panetta.

1. Difi drives us nuts, and anyone who reads the blog knows it. She's the Dem we're always having to beat up in order to get her to do the right thing (though Max Baucus comes a close second). So, I readily acknowledge your, my, first impulse to be "who cares what Difi says?" The problem is that America cares. To us, Diane Feinstein is a pain in the butt. To my mother - aka Middle America - she's a smart person, who is an expert on the issue, who has a D after her name, and who thinks the guy may not be qualified. She also has power and can screw with Obama mightily, now and in the future. Our dislike for Difi is irrelevant to this equation.

2. Then there's Rockefeller. Totally worthless human being and an absolute joke as the outgoing Intelligence chair. But to America at large, he's the outgoing chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and a Democrat. What he says matters to ma and pa in the sticks, even if the rest of us think he's a joke. And when he questions Obama's nominee in such a critical area, it matters to the public at large.

3. Panetta. Interesting choice. Opposed torture, not wedded to the national security special interests. I acknowledge all of that, and applaud it. But because he's an unusual choice, even an unconventional one, I'd argue that you need to handle this nomination very carefully, so as to avoid any possible hiccups (Democrats per se need to tread carefully in the area of national security because we've spent so many years letting Republicans pummel us with it).

This is another reality. Folks from the left are angered to high heaven and have been for some time with Feinstein and Rockefeller, but most of America knows these two as competent, able, centrist, okay, Democrats. In this matter, I disagree.

The bottom line, we must stand with Barack Obama on this appointment. Obama campaigned on the atrocities of Gitmo and the illegal use of the intelligence community, especially with Iraq. This needs to be cleaned up. There would not be an Iraq War today had the intelligence not been tampered with to back the reason for invading Iraq. That is what happened, that is the truth, which is why it is time for sweepers at the CIA.

Source

Home Page

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is mad at Obama

I mean she is having a hissy fit....

“I was not informed about the selection of Leon Panetta to be the CIA Director. I know nothing about this, other than what I’ve read,” Feinstein said in a statement. “My position has consistently been that I believe the Agency is best-served by having an intelligence professional in charge at this time.”

I am not sure that Obama meant to slight Feinstein, but his pick is one that she can not manipulate around her little finger.

And as for Obama's pick of Leon Panetta, he gets thumbs up by me, so far, for this statement:

Our forefathers prohibited "cruel and unusual punishment" because that was how tyrants and despots ruled in the 1700s. They wanted an America that was better than that. Torture is illegal, immoral, dangerous and counterproductive. And yet, the president is using fear to trump the law.

As Feinstein's lips are twisting in the wind, she is sending Obama a sound message that she is not happy with this pick. Hell she loves Bush's appointment in the CIA now, Mike Hayden. This same fellow who has indicated through leaks that he wants to retain the position as Director of the CIA. Obama did right, CLEAN HOUSE.

A Feinstein spokesman told CNN’s Dana Bash that the California senator found out about Obama’s pick after her staff showed her a New York Times report.

"The President-elect will now have a chance to make his arguments,” the spokesman said. “Her next move is to listen."

I am not a Feinstein fan for several reasons, she is a product of the old "status quo", and I have some issues on her votes or mainly her loyalty for her husband's business through her votes:

Critics have argued that Feinstein's support, as a member of the Senate's Military Construction Appropriations subcommittee, of policies that may benefit her husband may raise the appearance of a conflict of interest.[5] Suburban newspaper Metro Silicon Valley reported in 2007 that Feinstein's husband holds large investments in companies that have won large government contracts without competitive bidding. In April 2007, Feinstein's office denied there was a conflict of interest and stated that her departure from the subcommittee had nothing to do with the reports in the Metro weeklies.

At any rate, she will play politics in this appointment, or attempt to. Obama, Panetta I am sure you got your game on.

The Real Deal on Dianne Feinstein's Positions
Feinstein's husband makes milions, thanks to the war

Obama's intel pick an intentional break from the Bush Admin policies

Home Page

Leon Panetta is pegged to run the CIA

This is interesting. I totally did not see him in this job.

Two Democratic officials say President-elect Barack Obama has chosen former Clinton White House chief of staff Leon Panetta to run the CIA.

Panetta was a surprise pick for the post, with no experience in the intelligence world. An Obama transition official and another Democrat disclosed his nomination on a condition of anonymity since it was not yet public.

Panetta was director of the Office of Management and Budget and a longtime congressman from California.

He served on the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel that released a report at the end of 2006 with dozens of recommendations for the reversing course in the Iraq war.

Panetta currently directs with his wife Sylvia the Leon & Sylvia Panetta Institute for Public Policy, based at California State University, Monterey Bay a university he helped establish on the site of the former U.S. Army base, Fort Ord.

Source
MSNBC

Home Page