Illuminating Thoughts From Robert Gibbs

Robert Gibbs was asked about Dick Cheney’s recent remarks concerning the  harsh interrogation tactics by a reporter (Tapper?) at his daily press briefing yesterday.

Do you ever get the feeling that Gibbs likes to make glib, snarky comments, deriding the “right people” in lieu of answering the question, in hopes that a sycophantic press won’t call him out on it?

I get that feeling all the time. Sometimes it works for him. Sometimes it doesn’t:

He has no info on those CIA memos even though he promised two weeks ago to look into it. So what does he do?  He tries to get a little dig in on the former President and Vice President:

“I’ve been struck in watching the former President and former Vice President take markedly different views to…um…their lives post…their administration…uh I think many have…

“Uhhh, I think the answer he gave to the future of the Republican party, picking uh Rush Limbaugh over Colin Powell was uh was an illuminating answer uh about what you’re going to see going forward…”

The reporter without missing a beat: “How so?”

“Well..*dismissive shoulder shrug* I think that uh…you know…uh…(thinking furiously for another cool word to use like “illuminating”) Uh…I think you’ve got a series of ideas and a series of thoughts that um..in many ways the last election was about, and that the last election rejected  (read: “We won”)…uh…I think going forward…uh…they’re essentially going forward by looking backward…uh and if the (former) Vice President believes uh…that that’s the way of growing and expanding the Republican Party then uh  *shrug* we’ll have to leave him to those devices”.

EARTH TO ROBERT GIBBS:

Firstly, there’s nothing particularly “illuminating” about a  Republican preferring another Republican over someone he perceives as having left the party, no matter what the left wing blogs say.

Secondly: What are these “ideas” and “thoughts” you speak of, which you claim the electorate rejected? Since the subject under discussion was the interrogation tactics employed during the Bush administration, I’ll assume you mean that.

A recent poll shows that a majority of the American people agree with the Bush administration on waterboarding, and don’t want to see an investigation. So huh.

Thirdly, how sad and ironic it is that you would accuse the former Vice President of “looking backward”, when it’s THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION looking backward with its investigations, memo releases and Abu Ghraib picture releases. It is the Obamacrats who are looking backward and pointing fingers at the Bush administration’s policies which Cheney is simply trying to justify and defend. And it’s Obama who refuses to take credit for the massive deficits his own policies are creating by looking back at the Bush administration and blaming them.

Finally, the last thing Republicans need to do is take political advice from an Alinskyite Socialist Dem like you.

I hate to do it, but this calls for a Billy Madison response, (something I usually reserve for trolls):

(Mr Gibbs), what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

UPDATE:( 5/16):

Here’s Gibbs gibbering on about..”looking forward”, once again re the Pelosi situation,  since looking backward has not worked out so well for Democrats:

“I-I (pregnant pause) I think you’ve heard the President say this a number of times…uh..the best thing that we can do is to look forward….uh…the President is spending his time on any number of  issues, including keeping the American people safe…uh…by looking forward…”

Good lord, they should hand out shovels at these press briefings.

Some additional Illuminating Reading For Today:

FrontPageMagazine’s Jacob Laksin: Madam Doublespeaker

NRO’s Andrew McCarthy: Poison Photo-Drop

The American Thinker’s Kyle-Anne Shiver: Barack Obama: The Quintessential Liberal Fascist

Gateway Pundit: Liz Cheney: Obama Administration Is Playing “Dishonest Game”

DO not miss:

Robin in The American Thinker: “Letter of Amends from a Recovering Liberal in Berkeley“

One More:

This is a depressing read; the short version:

GE, which has received billions in bailouts, has a  new firm Healthymagination, (advisers include Tom Daschle), which has it’s hooks in Obama’s nationalized healthcare system, which will be heavily promoted by GE-owned media conglomerate MSNBC…prepare to be saturated…

See Doug Ross for the long version.

Video: Greg Pritchard On Britain’s Got Talent

Simon nailed it when he said it’s like a dog meowing.

Amazing.

Video: Cheney Rips Obama On Face The Nation

The Washington Times reports that Dick Cheney  continued “his verbal attack against President Obama”, on Sunday, saying that “the country is more vulnerable to a potential terrorist attack since the Obama administration took power”:

Mr. Cheney said that administration’s dismantling of many of the policies and protections instituted by President George W. Bush after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks — including the planned closing of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba and halting controversial prisoner interrogation techniques — have made the country more vulnerable to future attacks.

“That’s my belief,” Mr. Cheney said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “I think to the extent that those [Bush-era] policies were responsible for saving lives, that the administration is now trying to cancel those policies … means in the future we’re not going to have the same safeguards we’ve had for the last eight years.”

Some clips from the interview:

And Cheney takes sides in the Limbaugh/Powell dispute:

SNL’s take on Cheney – of course a bit of a caricature:

American Journalist, Roxana Saberi Freed From Iranian Prison

Roxanna Saberi, who has been jailed in Iran since January on espionage charges, has been freed, and can leave the country immediately, Fox News reports:

Abdolsamad Khorramshahi, one of Roxana Saberi’s attorney, said she is “now out of jail.”

Iran’s judiciary announced that the appeals court, which heard her case on Sunday, had reduced her jail term to a suspended two-year sentence, Khorramshahi said.

Abdolsamad Khorramshahi, one of Roxana Saberi’s attorney, said she is “now out of jail.”

Iran’s judiciary announced that the appeals court, which heard her case on Sunday, had reduced her jail term to a suspended two-year sentence, Khorramshahi said.

Saberi, a 32-year-old dual American-Iranian national who grew up in Fargo, North Dakota, was convicted last month of spying for the U.S. and sentenced to eight years in prison. An appeals court heard her case on Sunday.

Saberi had recently ended a two week hunger strike for ” health reasons”.

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit

Bombshell!: Digitally Magnified Photo Of Air Force One Surfaces

One picture from the infamous photo op of Air Force One buzzing around NYC was finally released by the Obama administration on Friday, and an unidentified digital photography expert has digitally magnified the photo.

Below is an exclusive of the shocking result:

Catholics Rip Obama And Notre Dame University

I keep hearing that support for Obama is high among Catholics, but I wonder what kind of Catholics? Regular church goers, or your twice a year cafeteria variety? I don’t know, but the non supporters seem to be the most vocal and most persuasive.

To wit: Ave Maria commencement speaker, Dr. Thomas Hilgers, who used his address on Saturday to sharply criticize Notre Dame’s decision to host President Barack Obama as its own commencement speaker on May 17.

Commencement speaker Dr. Thomas Hilgers, an obstetrician from Omaha who Ave Maria President Nicholas Healy described as a pioneer in “gynecological practices that are line with the teachings of the Catholic Church,” used his address to blast Notre Dame University’s decision to host President Barack Obama as its own commencement speaker on May 17.

Calling Obama “viciously pro-abortion,” Hilgers railed against Obama’s policies while likening the president to his own commencement speaker in the 1960s – a young priest Hilgers said later turned out to be “a denier of the Resurrection, pro-homosexuality and pro-contraception.”

Obama has “made available embryonic stem cell research funds, and as an obstetrician, I am in the cross-hairs of Obama’s administration,” said Hilgers, who received an honorary degree from the university.

Addressing the students directly, Hilgers said: “You’re going to be in the group of people – praise the Lord – who will have the opportunity to be a part of the culture of life.”

Father John Corapi, the powerhouse priest seen on EWTN  tells Notre Dame what’s what in no uncertain terms:

List of 70 Bishops who have responded to the Notre Dame Controversy, here.

What a bunch of fuddy duddies, huh?

Why can’t they be more like this “prominent Washington theologian”, and focus on more important things.

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit for the Ave Maria story, and Bruce at Curmudgeon’s Corner for the Father Corapi video.

Previous Posts On The Notre Dame Scandal:

Notre Dame Scandal Heating Up

Pro Life March Set For Notre Dame

Pro-Obama “We Support Notre Dame” Website Is Launched

Bishop of Phoenix sends Letter Of Rebuke to Notre Dame President

Notre Dame “Stop The Scandal” Petition Update

Stop The Scandal: Obama Invited To Notre Dame Commencement

More Details On The Chrysler Threats

Photoshop courtesy of  Darlene’s Place

Saw this at Atlas Shrugs, this morning:

The corrupt media lies by omission while propagandizing the ‘public enlightenment’. Goebbels redux. Obama and his goons are perfecting the “Big Lie” technique of propaganda — the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses.

And here is a serious charge made by the financial blog,  FINEM RESPICE, which the MSM is studiously ignoring:

This (as yet unproven) yarn goes exactly like this:

Confronting the head of a non-TARP fund holding Chrysler debt and unwilling to release it for any sum less than that to which it was legally entitled without compelling cause, this country’s “Car Czar” berated the manager of said fund with an outburst of prose substantially resembling this:

Who the f*** do you think you’re dealing with? We’ll have the IRS audit your fund. Every one of your employees. Your investors. Then we will have the Securities and Exchange Commission rip through your books looking for anything and everything and nothing we find to destroy you with.1

Several commentators, including the likes of DealBook erroneously assumed that the confrontation I referred to was merely a second description of the now famous “never happened, seriously” dispute between Steven Rattner and Perella Weinberg.

It was not.

What I failed to make clear was that, unlike the supposed experience of Tom Lauria’s client, the tale of woe that has been passed to me does not have as its agent of malice the White House Press Corps, which, while certainly annoying, lacks a certain killer instinct and terror inducing reputation. Instead, the creditors to which I refer were purportedly threatened with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Internal Revenue Service. Moreover, the fund whose tale I am privy to is allegedly not the only entity that was subject to such inducements. There are, according to my source, two others.

Of course, in the present climate it would take a rather courageous witness to come forward and confirm these allegations. Let’s hope that comes to pass.

No, scratch that. Let’s hope that the entire thing turns out to be a fabrication. While I doubt this, it would be much easier to sleep if it were.

This is much worse than just siccing the lapdog media on these firms…

The Business Insider asked the White House to respond to some of the the threat stories:

and after three days it has become apparent that they have no plans to respond. The White House has denied earlier charges that it threatened to use the White House press corps to ruin the reputation of a firm that was opposing its Chrysler plans.

By refusing to comment on our subsequent story about additional threats, the White House appears to be backing away from its earlier denial. If the threats weren’t made, why not just repeat the earlier denial? That would be easy enough.

So there you go. A few business rags and blogs are on this, but the MSM are AWOL, as usual, and we are instead treated to stories about  where the Obamas go out for lunch.

Hat tip: Eternity Road

Related rant by BlackIsWhite Imperial Consigliere at Taxes, Stupidity, and Death.

Flight 93 Memorial Blogburst #61

A Muslim consultant told the Park
Service in 2006 that the Crescent of Embrace memorial to Flight 93 cannot be
seen as a mihrab (the Mecca-direction indicator around which every
mosque is built), because the giant Islamic-shaped crescent does not point
exactly at Mecca:

Mihrab orientation is either correct
or not. It cannot be off by some degrees.

Saudi religious
authorities recently had to address this question when observers noted that
some 200 mosques in Mecca itself do not point directly at the Kaaba (the
“Sacred Mosque” that all Muslims are supposed to face for prayer). Meccans
who worried that their prayers might not count were assured by the
Islamic Affairs Ministry that “it does not affect the prayers.”

The necessity for such a rule is obvious. Throughout most of Islam’s 1400
year history, Muslims who were any significant distance from Mecca had no
accurate way to determine the direction to Mecca. Thus it became established
religious principle that what matters is intent. It is the
mind of the believer that needs to face directly towards the Kaaba,
and directly towards God. This principle applies in Mecca the same as
anywhere else.

All the great mosques of the ancient world point well away from
Mecca

Older mosques often point 10, 20, 30 or more degrees away from Mecca. The
most famous mihrab in the world, the mihrab of the Great Mosque in Cordoba
Spain, points more than 45° off of Mecca:

The Cordoba mihrab points south, while Mecca is east-southeast of Spain.

In contrast, the Crescent of Embrace points a mere 1.8° north of Mecca, ±
0.1°, which is highly accurate by Islamic standards.

The Muslim consultant who lied to the Park Service was a classmate
of architect Paul Murdoch

Who told the Park Service that a mihrab has to point exactly at Mecca to be
legitimate? It was Nasser Rabbat, a professor of Islamic architecture at MIT
and an expert in the history of mosque design. No one knows better than
Professor Rabbat that mihrab orientation does NOT have to be exact.

There is only one reason why Rabbat would lie to the Park Service about such
a basic fact. He recognizes that the giant Mecca-oriented crescent at the
heart of the Flight 93 memorial IS a legitimate mihrab, and he wants this al
Qaeda sympathizing plot to succeed.

A look at Rabbat’s background shows that he was a classmate of Crescent of Embrace architect Paul
Murdoch, both getting masters degrees in architecture from UCLA in 1984 and
both doing their masters work on Middle Easter subjects. (Murdoch wrote a
“masters project” titled: “A museum for Haifa, Israel.” Rabbat wrote a
master thesis on house design in Cairo and Damascus.)

This prior connection between Murdoch and Rabbat raises the possibility that
Murdoch himself was able to orchestrate the Park Service investigation into
warnings about his own design. By the same token, having the two classmates
both show up in the Flight 93 memorial raises the possibility that Rabbat
was Murdoch’s source of expertise on how to incorporate the full complement
of typical mosque features into his Crescent design. (For the dozen typical
mosque features, see Crescent of Embrace, chapter
5.)

The Crescent of Embrace also includes an exact
Mecca-orientation

While exact orientation on Mecca is not a traditional requirement, modern
mosque designers do generally employ now-available techniques for orienting
their mihrabs more precisely on Mecca than was previously possible. Murdoch
satisfies this modern norm (and provides hidden proof of intent) by
including a true thematically-defined crescent that does point
exactly at Mecca.

Murdoch’s thematic explanation for his crescent design is that the circle was
broken on 9/11 by the path of Flight 93. The terrorist-piloted airplane
smashes our peaceful circle, turning it into a giant Islamic-shaped crescent
(that just happens to point to Mecca). The terrorist-memorializing
implications of this theme are hardly less overt than the Islamic symbol
shapes themselves. Nothing particularly subtle here folks.

The symbolic breaking of the circle occurs at the upper crescent tip, where
the fifty-foot tall, thousand-foot long Entry Portal Wall is parted by the
Entry Portal Walkway, which follows the flight path through the wall:

The section of wall to the right of the walkway in this image is
symbolically “broken off” by the flight path. Remove this symbolically
broken off part, and the remaining crescent structure points EXACTLY at
Mecca, ± 0.1°:

What symbolically remains standing in the wake of 9/11: a giant
Islamic-shaped crescent pointing EXACTLY at Mecca.

Rabbat knew about this too, since the original report that Rabbat was
commenting on detailed both the slightly inexact Mecca-orientation of the
full Crescent of Embrace, and the exact-Mecca-orientation that results when
the symbolically broken-off parts are removed. Same for the Park Service. As
the original recipient of Alec Rawls‘ report,
the Park Service knew about both orientations. They also knew, because it
was also in the original report, that a mihrab does NOT have to point
exactly at Mecca. Yet they still publicly touted Rabbat’s claim that the
crescent can’t be seen as a mihrab because it doesn’t point exactly at
Mecca. A veritable web of self-conscious lies by Rabbat AND the Park
Service.

The design is called a broken circle now, but the circle is still broken in
the same place as before (where the flight path crosses the upper crescent
tip). The unbroken part of the circle, what is symbolically left standing in
the wake of 9/11, remains completely unchanged. It is stil
l a giant-Islamic shaped crescent, still pointing exactly at Mecca.

To join our blogbursts, just send your blog’s url.
And So I Go Animal Farm 1389 Blog – Antijihadist Tech A Defending Crusader A Fine Line Between Stupid and Clever A Liberal’s Worst Nightmare ACT Golden Gate Al Salibiyyah All American Blogger Almost Midnight in the West American Commentaries And Rightly So Anne Arundel Maryland Politics Alamo City Pundit ARRA News Service Atlas Shrugs Auntie Coosa Campfire Journal Bare Naked Islam Battle Dress U Because I’m Right Best Destiny Big Dog’s Weblog Big Sibling Blackboot Jacks blogito, ergo, sum Bob McCarty Writes Boston Maggie Cao2′s Weblog Cao’s Blog Chaotic Synaptic Activity Chester Street Chicago Ray Christmas Ghost Classic Liberal Clay Ritter Clay’s Rants and Musings Cocked and Loaded Colonel Robert Neville Always Dresses for Dinner Common Sense Junction Concrete Bob Covertress Creeping Sharia DC Protest Warrior Democrat = Socialist Dr. Bulldog and Ronin Error Theory EW1′s Intercept Log Faultline USA Flanders Fields Flopping Aces Founding Fathers of the Vast Right Wing Four Pointer Francase Place Freedom’s Enemies Freedom Warrior Fried Green Onions From My Position On the Way! Ft. Hard Knox Freedom Ain’t Free Garbanzo Toons General Rachel’s weblog GM’s Corner Green Country Values Gunservatively Haid Dasalami Hard to Swallow Heretics Crusade Holger Awakens Hollywood Conservative Hoosier Army Mom I’m having a thought here iOwnThewWorld.com Ironic Surrealism v3.0 Ivy League Conservatives Jack Lewis Jihad Press Jim-Rose – the Libertarian Popinjay Judge Right Just Barking Mad kae’s bloodnut blog Kender’s Musings Lemur King’s Folly Liberal Guy LGF 2.0: Little Green Blogmocracy Maggie’s Notebook MELAMPUS’S MENAGERIE!!!! Miss Beth’s Victory Dance Monkey in the Middle Muslims Against Sharia My Own Thoughts nabilchitown1 Neoconstant Nice Deb No Apology No Compromises When It Comes To Being Right! Noli insipientium iniurias pati Not A Sheep Ogre’s Politics and Views Old Soldier Papa Mike’s blog Part-Time Pundit Political Islam Principally Political Protest The Church Protest The Left Publius’ Forum Race, Politics, and Religion in the USA Rayra.net Redesigned Flight 93 memorial still an Islamo-fascist shrine Republican Attack Machine Right on the Right Right Truth Ron’s Musings Rosemary’s Thoughts Sad Old Goth Sarah Palin in Español Seattle Express Sharia Finance Watch Sheepdog Barking Shot in the Dark Smooth Stone Space 4 Commerce by Brian Dunbar Stix Blog Stop the ACLU Talk Wisdom Teen Pundit the Avid Editor The Conservative Guy The Gadfly The Great Lie of Islam The Grid The Hinge of Fate The Loyal Eagles The Midnight Sun The Mountain The Paradigm Shift The Political Octagon The Renaissance Biologist The Sanity Sentinel The Sisyphus Files The Strata-Sphere The Truth of Islam The View From the Turret The Wide Awakes Thunder Run Tizona’s Weblog Tough Girl 101 Traction Control United Conservatives We Have Some Planes Yes, but can I dance to it?

Video: Former ACORN Employees Tell All On Glenn Beck Show

Glenn Beck is doing the job the MSM won’t do: Investigating the thoroughly corrupt, and heavily subsidized left-wing group, ACORN. You can skip to about 2:50 on the first video:

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9NJzf4Zotw

Thanks to lukzbro777

Just so you know how much the Dems in Congress appreciate ACORN’s efforts:

ACORN-ELIGIBLE BLOCK GRANTS

DIP: $1 Billion in Stimulus: “For an additional amount for `Community Development Fund’ $1,000,000,000, to remain available until September 30, 2010 to carry out the community development block grant program under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.)” (H.R.1, Enrolled As Agreed To By Both House And Senate)

RE-DIP: $3.9 Billion in Omnibus: “The bill provides $3,900,000,000 for the Community Development Fund…” (“Division I – Transportation, Housing And Urban Development, And Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2009; Joint Explanatory Statement” Rules Committee, U.S. House Of Representatives, Pg. 106)

And now:

$5.7 Billion for the Obama Youth Corps.

UPDATE:

Okay, I’m just getting around to watching the videos, now, and I am stunned (not really) to hear Beck say that Conyers has backed down from investigating ACORN after promising to do so.

Michelle Malkin has the story.

Arrrgh!

I appreciate Karen Inman for suggesting that no more taxpayer money should  be going to ACORN.

It’s clear that ACORN is populated with many decent, well meaning people, who are mainly interested in empowering the disadvantaged, but ACORN is obviously a huge money making racket, and has made dupes out of  these well meaning people.

Scroll down from here to see all previous posts at Nice Deb concerning ACORN.

MORE:

RBO

Talk Wisdom

And John Fund has still MORE on ACORN’s voter fraud at the WSJ.

Also see Atlas Shrugs for more on the Obama ACORN SEIU connections.

Support The Keep Terrorists Out Of America Act

Never Again, courtesy of GOP.gov:

The bill:

The Keep Terrorists Out of America Act gives Members of Congress an opportunity to stand with the American people by affirming their opposition to releasing the terrorists at Guantanamo prison or bringing them into the United States. It also makes clear that governors and state legislatures must pre-approve the transfer or release of any terrorist detainee into their respective states. And lastly it requires the President to meet strict criteria and certification standards before terrorists housed at the Guantanamo prison could be brought to the United States. Following is a summary of the bill:

Affirming Congress’ Opposition to the Release and Transfer of Terrorists. The bill affirms Congress’ opposition to transferring or releasing terrorists held at the Guantanamo Bay prison into the United States. Most Americans do not support releasing these terrorists from Guantanamo Bay prison and transferring them into the United States. The bill gives Congress an opportunity to show that it stands with the American people on this critical matter, and opposes the release and transfer of these terrorists.

Governor & State Legislature Pre-Approval. The measure prohibits the Administration from transferring or releasing any terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay to any state without express approval from the state’s governor and legislature, and certifies to Congress that strict requirements have been met. For example, the Administration must certify to the respective governor and state legislature that the detainee does not pose a security risk to the United States. The certifications must be made 60 days before any transfer or release.

Presidential Certification Requirements. The measure prohibits the President from transferring or releasing a terrorist detainee into the United States unless he provides the following notification and certification to Congress regarding:

• The name of the detainee and transfer/release location in the United States.
• The release/transfer would not negatively impact continued prosecution of the detainee.

The release/transfer would not negatively impact continued detention of the detainee.

Who in Congress wants to be on record opposing that?

RELATED:

Obama Shrugged:

Debra Burlingame was among a group of USS Cole and 9/11 families that had the pleasure of meeting with the President back in February to express their concerns about Obama’s decision to close Gitmo, and suspend military commissions.

On Feb. 6, the president arrived in the Roosevelt Room to a standing though subdued ovation from some 40 family members. With a White House photographer in his wake, Mr. Obama greeted family members one at a time and offered brief remarks that were full of platitudes (“you are the conscience of the country,” “my highest duty as president is to protect the American people,” “we will seek swift and certain justice”). Glossing over the legal complexities, he gave a vague summary of the detainee cases and why he chose to suspend them, focusing mostly on the need for speed and finality.

Many family members pressed for Guantanamo to remain open and for the military commissions to go forward. Mr. Obama allowed that the detention center had been unfairly confused with Abu Ghraib, but when asked why he wouldn’t rehabilitate its image rather than shut it down, he silently shrugged. Next question.

Mr. Obama was urged to consult with prosecutors who have actually tried terrorism cases and warned that bringing unlawful combatants into the federal courts would mean giving our enemies classified intelligence — as occurred in the cases of the al Qaeda cell that carried out the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and conspired to bomb New York City landmarks with ringleader Omar Abdel Rahman, the “Blind Sheikh.” In the Rahman case, a list of 200 unindicted co-conspirators given to the defense — they were entitled to information material to their defense — was in Osama bin Laden’s hands within hours. It told al Qaeda who among them was known to us, and who wasn’t.

Mr. Obama responded flatly, “I’m the one who sees that intelligence. I don’t want them to have it, either. We don’t have to give it to them.”

How could anyone be unhappy with such an answer? Or so churlish as to ask follow-up questions in such a forum? I and others were reassured, if cautiously so.

Fast forward to today and it’s clear that they had been completely hosed.

“At best, he manipulated the families,” Kirk Lippold, commanding officer of the USS Cole at the time of the attack and the leader of the Cole families group, told me recently. “At worst, he misrepresented his true intentions.”

I think it’s the second one.

And the MUST READ of the day, via Flopping Aces:

FrontPageMagazine Interviews Dave Gaubatz, the first U.S. civilian (1811) Federal Agent deployed to Iraq in 2003.

An excerpt:

Yes, it is time American intelligence officers begin bringing forth the truth of the realities of how our brave troops were treated during Operation Iraqi Freedom by the same people who are now being protected and soon to be released by President Obama and with the support VP Biden, who knew the truth about our soldiers being tortured.

Why will he not speak about it? Did Biden know Iranians were entering Iraq and providing sophisticated weapons to Islamic terrorists to kill our brave troops? I am not trying to single out Biden who knew what was going on, but to let the American people understand both Republicans and Democratic leaders were aware of the situation in Iraq.

We were being encouraged by both parties to obtain intelligence to protect our troops and country.

When we went to war in 2003, we were facing an enemy we were not prepared for, and still aren’t. The enemy was not simply the Army of Saddam, but the Islamic terrorists who were residing in Iraq well before 2003.  Once we entered Iraq, the Iranians began entering southern Iraq and were paying Islamic suicide bombers to kill Americans. VP Biden and all key government leaders were provided reports of these acts.

Now I watch television daily and hear our liberal leaders whining about Islamic terrorists who may have been ‘slapped’, or put into a box with a caterpillar.  None of these liberals were standing up for civilian intelligence officers in 2003 that were being deployed to Iraq with misleading identification and weapons.

When we went to war in 2003, we were facing an enemy we were not prepared for, and still aren’t. The enemy was not simply the Army of Saddam, but the Islamic terrorists who were residing in Iraq well before 2003.  Once we entered Iraq, the Iranians began entering southern Iraq and were paying Islamic suicide bombers to kill Americans.

His message to the Dems in power:

Our troops knew in 2003 we were facing an ‘evil ideology’ of Islamic terrorists, many died, and many more will likely sacrifice their lives because we have politicians who care more for their careers than they do the security of our nation.

I am releasing several never before seen documents and photographs I obtained while working counter-intelligence/counter-intelligence in 2003. Why? Because the intelligence gathering abilities of our brave officers is being hampered, this translates into our country facing a national security threat from Islamic terrorists. This means our children will become their targets.

I believe it disturbs many Americans and the intelligence officers that now we have liberal Democrats in office who know the truth about the sufferings of our troops, and now stand up for the rights of Islamic terrorists who may have to be pushed around to save our troops. I will not be one responsible for their deaths and the sufferings their parents will go through simply because a politician wants to placate the liberals who care more for Islamic terrorists than they do for their neighbor’s son or daughter fighting for our country.

FP: Final words?

Gaubatz: I have never written or said anything I can’t substantiate under oath when required to do so. Will VP Biden, Pelosi or others do the same under oath? I believe it is time the American public demand they begin answering our questions; with their right hand raised, using a Bible, not the Quran. Thank you.

No, thank YOU, Mr. Gaubatz.

Video:Glenn Beck Expounds More On Scott Levenson

Glenn is still incredulous of his confrontation with the “unctuous” Scott Levenson, yesterday:

This should serve as a warning to all future Scott Levenson interviewers: If you forcefully challenge Scotty’s unctuous assertions, he’ll say you’re afraid of black people, and fight like a girl!

SWEET!

I made the R.S. McCain’s sidebar news feed!

Welcome The Other McCain readers…!

You’ll find no naked lady google bombs, here, but last year, I did have……oh…nevermind….

The Truth Comes Out: Nancy Pelosi Knew about The Waterboarding

 

Remember her fervent claim a couple of weeks ago, that she was never informed that the waterboarding interrogation technique was actually being used?

She was….. I repeat WAS lying, just as we suspected.

ABC News has got the goods:

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.

The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.

“Appears to contradict…” PUHleese!

She was lying through her teeth, just say it. These Dems in power right now think they can get away with anything.

The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”

She knew what was going on.

Lying to the American people….and not even to save her own hide, either. It’s worse than that.  The weasel was bending with the political winds  to smear the very people who helped to keep us safe for 7 years. How much lower can these people get? I guess we’ll be finding out.

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit

More at Hot Air.

Still More:

You can see a copy of the memo at Human Events

KUDOS to Jed Babbin for getting this scoop.

Happy Prayer Day

From Steven Crowder, (with an assist from the ACLU):

Liberal Fascism On The March

The barring of free speech edition via the Volokh Conspiracy:

Federal Felony To Use Blogs, the Web, Etc. To Cause Substantial Emotional Distress Through “Severe, Repeated, and Hostile” Speech?

That’s what a House of Representatives bill, proposed by Rep. Linda T. Sanchez and 14 others, would do. Here’s the relevant text:

Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication, with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person, using electronic means to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both….

["Communication"] means the electronic transmission, between or among points specified by the user, of information of the user’s choosing, without change in the form or content of the information as sent and received; …

["Electronic means"] means any equipment dependent on electrical power to access an information service, including email, instant messaging, blogs, websites, telephones, and text messages.

Volokh lists a just few of the different ways that this law could be applied, and it’s easy to see how politically inconvenient blogs and websites could be targeted. He thinks that such a vague, and unconstitutional law would be struck down by the Supreme Court, but what was Linda Sanchez even thinking?

Commenter Richard1: Why are you possibly taking this so seriously? 15 out of 435 sign on. It has no chance of passage, no chance of hearings. Every year stupid and unconstitutional bills are proposed.

Another Commenter may have the answer: It’s just the opening salvo of applying speech limitations on the internet.

It’s something to keep an eye on. Liberals are patient, and they tend to get what they want, eventually.

Hat tip: Stop the ACLU

Video:Megyn Kelly Interviews John Bolton On Spanish Torture Inquisition

Megyn Kelly interviewed John Bolton following his oped in the Washington Post, about Obama’s prosecutions by proxy:

Unbelievable.

Bolton writes in the WaPo oped:

The question here is not whether one agrees or disagrees with the advice the lawyers gave, or with their superiors’ operative decisions concerning interrogation techniques. Nor is it even whether one believes our Justice Department should launch criminal investigations into their actions. (I believe strongly that criminalizing policy disagreements is both inappropriate and destructive.)

Instead, the critical question is who judges the official actions that U.S. personnel took while holding government office. Is it our own executive and judicial branches, within our constitutional structures and protections, or some unaccountable foreign or international magistrate in some unaccountable distant court? The proper U.S. position is to insist that our Constitution alone governs any review of our officials’ conduct.

This issue is not abstract. For the six lawyers, it has immediate effects on their lives, careers and families. Moreover, whether or not Obama has decided against prosecuting CIA agents, his decision in no way binds the creative mind of Señor Garzón, a man who has never shied from spotlights. Indeed, U.N. Special Rapporteur Manfred Nowak has already said that the other 145 states party to the Convention Against Torture must launch their own criminal investigations if the United States does not.

Behind-the-scenes diplomacy is often the best, and sometimes the only, way to accomplish important policy objectives, and one hopes that such efforts are underway. But in this case, firm and public statements are necessary to stop the pending Spanish inquisition and to dissuade others from proceeding. The president must abandon his Ehrlichman-like policy and pronounce unequivocally that Spain should take whatever steps are necessary to stop Garzón.

Who can predict what the Pres will do in this case? Has Soros weighed in? Ayers? TOTUS?