The CIA Directors' Letter

Seven former CIA directors sent a letter to Wonderboy last week imploring him to call his AG off of the CIA witch hunt.

Here's the text of the letter, posted on the RealClearPolitics website. The seven signatories are:
Michael Hayden, Porter Goss, George Tenet, John Deutch, R. James Woolsey, William Webster, and James R. Schlesinger.

Some have made much of the omission of Stan Turner and (former President) George H. Bush. I mentioned this to my friend, B, at lunch on Monday. He noted that Bush wasn't at the Kennedy funeral, and may not be entirely capable of participating in an issue of this depth. Ditto for Turner. I Googled Carter's CIA Director and learned his is 86 years old.

It's very likely that these two simply aren't in shape to join this sort of effort.

Thus, the statement, "every living CIA Director not associated with the current administration" an almost-quote of Fox News contributor Charles Krauthammer, might be more pragmatically amended to read, "every living CIA Director able to address this issue, and not associated with the current administration."

Krauthammer has taken some heat online for his technically incorrect statement. But, practically speaking, I believe he is correct.

This letter is a stunning event and clear warning to voters of the magnitude of Wonderboy's administration's stripping America of its defenses.

You don't get this type of unanimity among such a large collection of politically-appointed executives spanning over thirty years of CIA service.

We can only hope our First Rookie pays attention and responds positively to this commique. If he doesn't, and Holder proceeds, this is going to become a serious problem for US security. But, on the bright side, another piece of fuel for the movement that will drive Wonderboy from office in three years, and, hopefully, his party from control of the House next year.

Black Panther Voter Intimidation Okay, CIA Interrogation of Terrorists Criminal

I wrote recently of several, when taken together, bizarre actions emanating from Wonderboy's Justice Department.

As sort of an afterthought, I included the recent decision to drop prosecution of the Black Panthers who engaged in documented, undeniable voter intimidation in Philadelphia last November.

As I've reflected on that post, I realize there's a more clear juxtaposition between the CIA prosecution and that of the Black Panthers.

This administration is consciously and deliberately weakening our defenses, while also consciously and deliberately failing to punish voter intimidation.

It's as if Wonderboy is acting to trigger a crisis in America. A crisis by which he can call for special powers. And, in the process, perhaps alter an otherwise-unbroken string of elections from 1789 until today.

These two actions are both just so inexplicable without the assumption that the president who sanctioned them wants a harmful outcome for America, rather than the one to which he swore when he took the oath of his office last November.

Frisco Nan's Incredible Arrogance

It seems incredible that, after personally causing a political firestorm by accusing the CIA of lying to her, Frisco Nan (Pelosi) now refuses to answer further questions regarding the affair.

Is this extreme political arrogance, or what? To me, it smacks of the imperiousness with which our elected federal representatives now comport themselves. They seem to believe that their election to Congress places them above the rest of us, rather than makes them civil servants.

How can Nan, the Speaker of the House, seriously believe she is above accountability for her reckless charges against one of our nation's primary security agencies?

Whether Democrat or Republican, Congressional members who display this sort of arrogance demonstrate, yet again, why there seems to be a rising backlash against them across the nation.

Frisco Nan As A Lightning Rod

Frisco Nan's accusations that CIA staffers lied to her over 'enhanced interrogation methods' has already resulted in a surprising development.

Republicans have gone from pinning her publicly to her accusations, to demanding she be confronted with evidence, to calling for her resignation as Speaker.

And now, with her credibility shredded and dislike of her grown nationwide, they are sensibly backing off.

Instead, virtually all leading Republicans agree it's better to now have Pelosi as the hated, public face of Democratic Congressional power for the next election cycled. In effect, serving as a lightning rod on which to gather building voter anger over excessive spending, intrusive legislation and the too-fast, overreaching grab for the Nanny state by this California liberal.

Keeping her dancing on the issue of her CIA accusations, and potential release of evidence showing her to be lying, will be enough to satisfy most Republicans.

Frisco Nan's Accusation

You'd think Frisco Nan couldn't have ensnared herself in the tar of the CIA interrogation methods mess, after reading this post from late last month.

You would be wrong.

Last week, the Speaker's weekly gabfest, at which she parades out in front of the press, resulted in a feeding frenzy. For once, inexplicably, the liberal press began to grill Nan on the 'enhanced interrogation methods' issue.

Nan buckled and blurted out that the CIA had lied to her. She was asked pointedly about this by a reporter, and affirmed that the agency's personnel had "lied" to her.

Even liberal CIA director Leon Panetta, the administration's stooge heading up the agency, fired back at Nan, protecting his agency and its personnel.

Nan continues to exhibit her less-then-average intelligence, if you pardon the pun, in this affair.

She's now on record with about four different explanations of what she thought she knew, and when. Now she's compounded it by accusing CIA personnel of simply lying to her.

Nan seems to believe that being Speaker makes her unassailable and infallible. Sort of like Jim Wright used to behave when he was Speaker.

This time, however, Nan has made a serious miscalculation. There were others at the briefings. Her own staff member attended at least one briefing at issue. And there were minutes of the briefings. As my prior post noted, some have pointed out that, if Nan didn't voice objections to the interrogation methods at the time, then she's in a very bad position now.

Since Nan threw down the gauntlet and accused the CIA of lying, it's a fairly simple matter to now investigate just who is lying. If it's not the CIA, then it has to be Frisco Nan. There's no other conclusion anymore.

Could the House Democratic blue dogs eventually call for her resignation as Speaker if Nan is shown to be the liar?