Pelosi challenged on waterboarding account

Former CIA Director Porter Goss, a Republican, is adding his two-cents to the growing debate over whether Democrats knew about the agency’s use of waterboarding, and his view does not favor House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Goss, writing Saturday in the Washington Post, Goss recalled that in the fall of 2002, while he was chairing the House Intelligence Committee and Pelosi was its ranking member, they were briefed by the CIA on the enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding.

And Goss makes a distinction that is in direct conflict with Pelosi, who acknowledges being told about waterboarding, but only that it was something in interrogation tool box, not that it was actually being used.

Goss said members were briefed several times between 2002 and 2008  “and we certainly understood what the CIA was doing,”

Goss said that not only were senior lawmakers aware of the techniques, the members gave the CIA bipartisan support, additional funding and asked if there was anything more they could do to support the effort to battle terrorism.

Goss points out that these briefings took place in the days following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and both Republicans and Democrats were eager to help the CIA ward off any new threats.

The Goss piece comes after the CIA released a pile of memos detailing the briefings to Congress about waterboarding dating back to 2002 and in those notes, according to the CIA, they included the “description of the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed.”

Pelosi said Friday that out of 40 CIA briefings described by the agency, she was briefed only once.

“I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future,” Pelosi said.  “The Administration advised that legal counsel for both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal.”

Pelosi also points out that CIA Director Leon Panetta “concedes that the descriptions provided by the CIA may not be accurate.”

Related Content