So Pannetta just issued a mealy-mouthed statement that the CIA

[Skidmore]

"has no policy" to be dishonest. People violate policy all the time. BS. Tenet and Goss used weasel words too.

[polichick]

1. He also mentioned the dates in question (April 02) and sided with the CIA.

[Justitia]

2. Yeah, it's not in the personnel manual. What a joke. It's their job description.

Who is stupid enough to believe the CIA on this?

[UnrepentantUnitarian]

3. Agreed!

We all know they have no "policy" to mislead...but it does happen. He's said nothing, really, but the news channels will make a major deal over it anyway.

[ejpoeta]

4. what is he talking about!!! the CIA's policy IS to be dishonest.

they lie for a living!! valerie plame worked for the CIA, didn't she? undercover?? with some fake name and fake job!! that was her JOB.... how funny is that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. At the macro level, he called Pelosi a liar...and I tend to trust Pannetta more than Pelosi

[rocktivity]

6. But lying, cheating, stealing, and dishonesty

is what the CIA all about!

Besides, "No policy to be dishonest" is a LONG way from "she's wrong."

:rofl:
rocktivity

[asjr]

7. Panetta's reply re CIA has no policy to be dishonest

is true--it is the previous ones that are not true. I feel, behind the scenes, Obama and Co. are giving the other side plenty of rope to hang themselves. I may be wrong but that is the way it feels to me.

[EFerrari]

8. LOL!

[bdamomma]

9. oh crap, just have an investigation into the whole thing.

[Joanne98]

10. Fuck the punk

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Whether the majority of DU ends up believing Pelosi or Panetta is almost immaterial

I've already been accused of being a pathetic loser for caring what right-wingers think about Democrats, but this issue is all about public perception. We could all side with Nancy Pelosi in our happy bubble and clear her of all accusations, at least on DU. But if a large percentage of Americans still thinks she's damaged goods, then by definition, she is. I think the only possible way for her to get herself in the clear is for a thorough and public (insofar as possible) investigation.

Nonetheless, Panetta appears to have just sold Pelosi down the river, irrespective of who is or is not telling the truth or sidestepping it. Whether fair or not, Pelosi is now in a position where she must explain herself more comprehensively.

And yes, I'm aware that Pelosi didn't torture anyone and that Dick Cheney must be thrilled to be the architect of torture in plain open sight while Pelosi gets all the bad press cycles and attacks from the GOP. That's not right, but it is the situation as it exists, so it had better be dealt with swiftly because the Republicans are never going to let go of it as long as they perceive Pelosi to be vulnerable.

This entire issue needs to be met head-on. Up to now, it's been anything but.