Feinstein: Hayden using an 'old male fallback'

 

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Tuesday the assertion that her emotions played a part of the panel's report on CIA interrogation is "nonsense" and "stereotypical."

Feinstein blasted former CIA Director Michael Hayden for making the comments and said he was reverting to "an old male fallback position."

ADVERTISEMENT
"And there is no question that there are a lot of people out there — I suspect one of them is former CIA Director Hayden — that does not want that report to come out,” she said on MSNBC. “So one of the things you do is try to blur the reputation of someone connected to the report."

Over the weekend, Hayden, citing a Washington Post op-ed, said Feinstein "wanted a report so scathing that it would ensure that an un-American brutal program of detention interrogation would never again be considered or permitted. Now, that sentence, that motivation for the report … may show deep emotional feeling on part of the senator. But I don't think it leads you to an objective report." 

Feinstein pointed out that the report began under the previous chairman and proceeded with votes from the full committee. 

During a blistering speech last Monday, Feinstein said the report would ensure a similar program would never happen again. 

"If the Senate can declassify this report, we will be able to ensure that an un-American, brutal program of detention and interrogation will never again be considered or permitted," Feinstein said at the time.  

The Senate Intelligence Committee last week voted 11-3 to declassify portions of the 6,200-page report, including the executive summery and conclusion. It will ultimately head to the CIA for redaction before being made public.  

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on the Senate floor Monday also criticized Hayden for his comments, which Reid called condescending. 

“Does that sound like a man that respects women?" Reid asked. "Do the Republicans sound like a party that treats women equally? So much for equality under the law.”