May 8th, 2009
05:00 PM ET

Comedian determining balance of power Senate?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Minnesota still hasn't decided the outcome of its Senate race more than six months since Election Day, and the stakes are higher than ever. With the defection of Arlen Specter from the Republican Party, Minnesota's race takes on a whole new meaning.

Franken with Cirque du Soleil performers during a 2003 appearance on 'The Tonight Show' with Jay Leno.

If Al Franken wins, he'll become the 60th Democratic senator and the party will have a filibuster-proof majority. This would likely help President Obama get through his upcoming Supreme Court nominee along with big initiatives like health care.

Vice President Joe Biden met with Franken this week and said the administration looks forward to working with him once Minnesota's Supreme Court issues its final ruling. That's where the race is now tied up.

A three-judge panel ruled Franken is the winner, but Norm Coleman won't go away. He has asked for a recount of at least 1,300 ballots. Coleman is trailing Franken by 312 votes. Coleman's appeal could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court; even though some in the Republican Party concede it's not looking good for him.

By all accounts, it seems likely that Al Franken - a former comedian who appeared on Saturday Night Live and a former liberal radio host - will win. One Democratic consultant and a friend of Franken says it's ironic for a comedian to carry so much power, but "Franken is certainly comfortable with irony."

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean that a comedian will determine the balance of power in the U.S. Senate?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: Al Franken
May 8th, 2009
04:00 PM ET

Do you believe Pelosi when she says she wasn't told about torturing prisoners?‬‪

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

There's a new chapter in the saga over who knew what - and when they knew it - when it comes to the ongoing torture debate. The Obama administration just released records that show House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed in September 2002 about the enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed against al Qaeda prisoners. Past tense - had been.

House Speaker Pelosi maintains she was not told that so-called enhanced interrogation techniques were used.

The documents don't list the specific methods covered during that briefing. However, during the preceding month, the CIA apparently waterboarded Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times.

This doesn't exactly match what Pelosi has been telling us. Pelosi has previously acknowledged being briefed on the CIA's program, but says she only knew about methods they were considering - not about ones they actually used.

As recently as a week ago, Nancy Pelosi said: "We were not - I repeat were not - told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used."

With the release of these new records, Pelosi came out with a carefully worded statement: That she had been briefed only once; she was told the techniques were legal but that waterboarding had not yet been used.

Republicans have been accusing Democrats, like Pelosi, of hypocrisy for getting all outraged about torturing terror suspects - and calling for investigations. They say the Democrats have known about it for years and are only now causing a row because suddenly the information was made public.

Former CIA director and Former Republican Congressman Porter Goss describes these lawmakers' claims as "a disturbing epidemic of amnesia."

Here’s my question to you: Do you believe Nancy Pelosi when she says she was never told about torturing prisoners?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?