A Republican member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday stood behind former Vice President Dick Cheney's opposition to a preliminary Justice Department probe into interrogations of terror suspects that may have broken the law.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) made his remarks on Twitter today:
Cheney's right, thank God after 911 he was there instead of his detractors, lest America would have suffered even more terrorist attacks.
"The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions," Cheney said in a statement on Monday.
"President Obama's decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration's ability to be responsible for our nation's security," he added.
Attorney General Eric Holder announced on Monday that he will appoint career Justice Department prosecutor John Durham to open an investigation of several incidents in which terror suspects may have been tortured by government agents.
Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Monday praised Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to name a special prosecutor who will determine whether or not to launch a full-scale criminal investigation of the CIA's terror interrogation tactics.
"I am grateful that the Justice Department is finally being led by an independent Attorney General who is willing to begin investigating this dark chapter in our country's history," Leahy said in a release. "I had no doubt that he would put the interests of the law ahead of politics, and he has demonstrated that."
The sixth-term senator added he still hopes for a full "nonpartisan, independent review" to examine the interrogations.
"This investigation will also bring a measure of accountability to the American people in holding responsible those whose decisions may have undermined our values and our laws," he said of the special prosecutor's probe.
The Washington Post reported this afternoon that Holder will appoint career Justice Department prosecutor John Durham to examine several incidents in which CIA personnel may have violated anti-torture laws while interrogating suspected terrorists.
One of the biggest critics of a proposal to move Guantanamo Bay prisoners to the continental U.S. is set to testify before his home state's legislature to lay out his case against the move.
Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) will speak before the state Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday afternoon to speak in opposition to a plan that would transfer suspected terrorists at Guantanamo to the state's Standish prison, which is set to be shuttered. The Detroit News reported the story.
The ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee has firmly opposed a White House proposal to move the prisoners from the facility in Cuba to either Michigan or Kansas. Hoekstra has said Gitmo prisoners would make the area unsafe and drive tourists and business out of the economically struggling state.
Sen. Pat Robers (R-Kan.) made similar arguments about sending the prisoners to Fort Leavenworth, Kan. He also threatened to shut down the Senate if the proposal is approved.
But local and national pressure may be pushing back against opposition to the plan. With the prison closing, many Standish-area officials favor taking Guantanamo prisoners in order to prevent prison workers from losing their jobs.
The Gitmo proposal is now one of the only remaining options after a plan to transfer California prisoners to the Michigan facility fell through today.
Last week, federal officials from the Justice, Defense, and Homeland Security departments toured the Standish facility to judge its suitability to house the suspected terrorists.
Michigan Republican Rep. Mike Rogers on Tuesday derided the Obama administration's new proposal to move terror suspects from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba to the U.S. mainland as "cash for the clink."
An interagency task force on detention policy drafted a proposal, which has yet to be approved by top officials, that will transfer detainees to the military base at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. or a maximum security prison in Standish, Mich. that will soon be closed.
"This is called 'cash for the clink,' I think," Rogers said on an RNC conference call. Rogers referenced the "Cash for Clunkers" auto rebate program that ran out of funding after less than a week in operation.
The proposal would keep the prison open and theoretically preserve the jobs of guards and other prison employees.
Rogers stressed that moving terror suspects into his home state would pose a national security threat and discourage business and tourism from flocking there.
Should the government transfer Gitmo prisoners to Michigan, Roberts said "I doubt even Jeff Daniels could sell people to come to Michigan," alluding to promotional advertisements for the state featuring actor Jeff Daniels.
The fifth-term congressman, who worked as an FBI special agent in the 1980s, said that Guantanamo Bay prisoners pose greater danger than inmates already housed in U.S. penitentiaries. They are "psychologically conditioned to commit murder to go to heaven," Rogers said.
The Michigander said that the terror suspects could harm prison guards and radicalize the existing prison population should they be housed in the continental U.S.
Here is the Jeff Daniels ad that Rogers brought up:
In a recent meeting with lawmakers, CIA Director Leon Panetta acknowledged that the agency had misled Congress about "significant actions" the agency took between 2001 and this week, House Democrats charge.
It's not clear what the CIA misled lawmakers about, however.
A number of House Democrats are now asking Panetta to correct his earlier assertion that the CIA does not lie to Congress, a charge he made to rebut Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) claim that she was misled by the agency.
"Recently you testified that you have determined that top CIA officials have concealed significant actions from all Members of Congress, and misled Members for a number of years from 2001 to this week," the House Democrats wrote in a letter to Panetta. "This is similar to other deceptions of which we are aware from other recent periods."
In May, responding to Pelosi's charges, Panetta denied that the CIA lies to lawmakers.
"Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress," he said. "This is against our laws and values."
Meanwhile, Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.), the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, is charging that the CIA "affirmatively lied" to Congress.
"This committee has been misled, has not been provided full and complete notifications, and [in at least one case] was affirmatively lied to," Reyes wrote in a letter to House leaders on Tuesday.
Reyes did not explain what the CIA had lied about, however.
Greg Sargent reports that House Democrats are pushing to expand the number of lawmakers included in classified CIA briefings.
As it stands, only the "Gang of Eight" are briefed--the party leaders in each chamber, and the chairman and ranking members of the respective Intelligence Committees. The new proposal would allow all members of the Intelligence Committee to receive briefings.
The goal, apparently, is both to improve oversight and prevent intra-branch spats that cannot be confirmed, like Nancy Pelosi's recent fiasco with the CIA. The more people are briefed, the harder it will be for either side to miscontrue what happened.
Sargent suggests Republicans might oppose the proposal on the grounds that it would make leaks more likely. But then again...
Bush administration lawyer John Yoo can be sued over his role in crafting the administration's terror policies, a federal judge ruled Friday.
According to multiple reports, inmate Jose Padilla will be allowed to proceed with his suit because, according to the judge, Yoo exceeded his role as an attorney when he counseled the president to use any means necessary to capture terrorists and extract information from them.
Human rights advocates and some liberal groups had hope to see Yoo made available to testify on his role, if not stand outright prosecution.
A bare plurality of Americans believe that the CIA may have misled Speaker Nancy Pelosi about the use of waterboarding on detainees, according to a new Rasmussen poll.
43% of respondents said it was either "very" (20%) or "somewhat" (23%) likely that the "CIA misled Pelosi about the use of waterboarding when interrogating prisoners[.]"
41% said it was either "not very" (19%) or "not at all" (22%) likely. 16% were not sure.
Other findings in the poll:
-63% of Americans have either a very (25%) or somewhat (38%) favorable opinion of the CIA.
-65% of Americans have been following the Pelosi/CIA story either very (38%) or somewhat (27%) closely.
-59% of Americans believe it is either very (40%) or somewhat (19%) likely that "waterboarding and other harsh techniques helped secure valuable intelligence information."
Pelosi has said the CIA briefed her that enhanced interrogation techniques like waterboarding were legal, but she insists they was never informed that waterboarding was being used.
The three other members of Congress who received similar briefings are split along party lines in their recollection. Former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) said he was not informed of waterboarding or any other enhanced interrogation techinques, while Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) and former Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.) said they were.
Yesterday, I wrote that it remained unclear whether Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), one of just three members of Congress besides Nancy Pelosi who received a CIA briefing on interrogation techniques in the fall of 2002, had been informed that waterboarding was being used on detainees.
Shelby's office now says he was in fact told that waterboarding was being used. This directly contradicts the recollection of former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who was present in the same briefing as Shelby.
Shelby's office released a statement yesterday (see below) indicating Shelby was informed of the "existence of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" (emphasis added) and was told "how these techniques were consistent with the law[.]" When asked whether Shelby was informed that waterboarding was actually being used, a spokesman replied that "waterboarding was one of the EITs the CIA briefed Sen. Shelby on."
Today, his office released an additional statement clarifying the Senator's recollection (the first paragraph is identical to yesterday's statement. The second paragraph is new):
As Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002, Senator Shelby was briefed by the CIA on the Agency's interrogation program and the existence of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs). To his recollection, not only did the CIA briefers provide what was purported to be a full account of the techniques, they also described the need for these techniques and the value of the information being obtained from terrorists during questioning. The Senate briefing also included an explanation of how these techniques were consistent with the law and with the national security interests of the U.S. To his recollection, while there was a great deal of discussion, there were no objections raised during the Senate briefing he attended.
To Senator Shelby's recollection of the Senate briefing, waterboarding was one the EITs the CIA said it had used. As he also recalls, the CIA described the valuable intelligence it obtained using EITs, including waterboarding. [emphasis added]
So there you have it. This is significant for two reasons. First, former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) remembers the briefing with Shelby much differently, maintaining that he does not "have any recollection of being briefed on waterboarding or other forms of extraordinary interrogation techniques, or Abu Zubaydah being subjected to them."
Second, a CIA document released last week characterizes the briefing with Graham and Shelby in exactly the same language as it characterizes the briefing with Pelosi:
Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed. [emphasis added]
Former Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.), who was present at Pelosi's briefing, argued in a Washington Post op-ed last month that the briefings were very clear about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding.
So for now, Graham and Pelosi maintain they did not know waterboarding was being used, while Goss and Shelby say they did know.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), one of just a handful of members of Congress besides Nancy Pelosi who was briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques in the fall of 2002, received "what was purported to be a full account" of the techniques then being used on detainees, his spokesman says.
"As Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002, Senator Shelby was briefed by the CIA on the Agency's interrogation program and the existence of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs)," said Jonathan Graffeo, a spokesman for Shelby. "To his recollection, not only did the CIA briefers provide what was purported to be a full account of the techniques, they also described the need for these techniques and the value of the information being obtained from terrorists during questioning. The Senate briefing also included an explanation of how these techniques were consistent with the law and with the national security interests of the U.S. To his recollection, while there was a great deal of discussion, there were no objections raised during the Senate briefing he attended."
When asked whether Shelby was informed that waterboardbing was being used, Graffeo responded: "Waterboarding was one of the EITs the CIA briefed Sen. Shelby on."
First, note that the waterboarding response does not indicate whether Shelby was told it was being USED.
Shelby was briefed on the "existence of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" [emphasis added] and was informed of the "need for these techniques and the value of the information being obtained from terrorists during questioning." It's unclear to me whether this means Shelby was told the techniques were actually being used.
Intelligence documents released last week (see here, via Greg Sargent) characterize the briefing with Shelby and Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) this way:
"Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed." [emphasis added]
This characterization is identical to how the CIA characterized the separate briefing with Pelosi and then-Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.)
Graham has said that he does not "have any recollection of being briefed on waterboarding or other forms of extraordinary interrogation techniques, or Abu Zubaydah being subjected to them."
Most Viewed RSS Feed »
