Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Obama provided evidence of Bush's torture program to the Senate, and Obama is covering up torture?
The CIA and Senate are in a battle over documents related to an ongoing torture investigation, and people want the most important issue to be "OMG, Obama coverup," not the investigation.
Consider the timeline and the facts.
The removals happened in 2010. It's not hard to believe that there are people at the CIA who don't want this information to come out.
Reading into Senator Feinstein's statement and the timeline: Brennan wasn't head of the CIA when the documents were removed, but interestingly he lost out on the position in Obama's first term because of his support for torture.
Feinstein:
As CIA Director Brennan has stated, the CIA officially agrees with some of our study. But, as has been reported, the CIA disagrees and disputes important parts of it. And this is important: Some of these important parts that the CIA now disputes in our committee study are clearly acknowledged in the CIA’s own Internal Panetta Review.
To say the least, this is puzzling. How can the CIA’s official response to our study stand factually in conflict with its own Internal Review?
To say the least, this is puzzling. How can the CIA’s official response to our study stand factually in conflict with its own Internal Review?
Heads will likely roll at the CIA at the conclusion of an investigation into the removal of the documents. It's likely there could be criminal charges. Still, the main purpose of this trampling on the separation of powers is an attempt to hide Bush's torture program.
The report, if as damaging as Feinstein states, should result in war crime prosecutions.
Now here is a key point: The most sought-after documents on torture, ones the CIA is desperate to keep from the public, were created/turned over by Leon Panetta.
Feinstein:
<...>
On March 5, 2009, the committee voted 14-1 to initiate a comprehensive review of the CIA Detention and Interrogation Program. Immediately, we sent a request for documents to all relevant executive branch agencies, chiefly among them the CIA.
The committee’s preference was for the CIA to turn over all responsive documents to the committee’s office, as had been done in previous committee investigations.
Director Panetta proposed an alternative arrangement: to provide literally millions of pages of operational cables, internal emails, memos, and other documents pursuant to the committee’s document requests at a secure location in Northern Virginia. We agreed, but insisted on several conditions and protections to ensure the integrity of this congressional investigation.
Per an exchange of letters in 2009, then-Vice Chairman Bond, then-Director Panetta, and I agreed in an exchange of letters that the CIA was to provide a “stand-alone computer system” with a “network drive” “segregated from CIA networks” for the committee that would only be accessed by information technology personnel at the CIA—who would “not be permitted to” “share information from the system with other (CIA) personnel, except as otherwise authorized by the committee.”
It was this computer network that, notwithstanding our agreement with Director Panetta, was searched by the CIA this past January, and once before which I will later describe.
<...>
There are several reasons why the draft summary of the Panetta Review was brought to our secure spaces at the Hart Building.
Let me list them:
The significance of the Internal Review given disparities between it and the June 2013 CIA response to the committee study. The Internal Panetta Review summary now at the secure committee office in the Hart Building is an especially significant document as it corroborates critical information in the committee’s 6,300-page Study that the CIA’s official response either objects to, denies, minimizes, or ignores.
Unlike the official response, these Panetta Review documents were in agreement with the committee’s findings. That’s what makes them so significant and important to protect.
When the Internal Panetta Review documents disappeared from the committee’s computer system, this suggested once again that the CIA had removed documents already provided to the committee, in violation of CIA agreements and White House assurances that the CIA would cease such activities.
As I have detailed, the CIA has previously withheld and destroyed information about its Detention and Interrogation Program, including its decision in 2005 to destroy interrogation videotapes over the objections of the Bush White House and the Director of National Intelligence. Based on the information described above, there was a need to preserve and protect the Internal Panetta Review in the committee’s own secure spaces.
Now, the Relocation of the Internal Panetta Review was lawful and handled in a manner consistent with its classification. No law prevents the relocation of a document in the committee’s possession from a CIA facility to secure committee offices on Capitol Hill. As I mentioned before, the document was handled and transported in a manner consistent with its classification, redacted appropriately, and it remains secured—with restricted access—in committee spaces.
<...>
I also want to reiterate to my colleagues my desire to have all updates to the committee report completed this month and approved for declassification. We’re not going to stop. I intend to move to have the findings, conclusions and the executive summary of the report sent to the president for declassification and release to the American people. The White House has indicated publicly and to me personally that it supports declassification and release.
- more -
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=db84e844-01bb-4eb6-b318-31486374a895
On March 5, 2009, the committee voted 14-1 to initiate a comprehensive review of the CIA Detention and Interrogation Program. Immediately, we sent a request for documents to all relevant executive branch agencies, chiefly among them the CIA.
The committee’s preference was for the CIA to turn over all responsive documents to the committee’s office, as had been done in previous committee investigations.
Director Panetta proposed an alternative arrangement: to provide literally millions of pages of operational cables, internal emails, memos, and other documents pursuant to the committee’s document requests at a secure location in Northern Virginia. We agreed, but insisted on several conditions and protections to ensure the integrity of this congressional investigation.
Per an exchange of letters in 2009, then-Vice Chairman Bond, then-Director Panetta, and I agreed in an exchange of letters that the CIA was to provide a “stand-alone computer system” with a “network drive” “segregated from CIA networks” for the committee that would only be accessed by information technology personnel at the CIA—who would “not be permitted to” “share information from the system with other (CIA) personnel, except as otherwise authorized by the committee.”
It was this computer network that, notwithstanding our agreement with Director Panetta, was searched by the CIA this past January, and once before which I will later describe.
<...>
There are several reasons why the draft summary of the Panetta Review was brought to our secure spaces at the Hart Building.
Let me list them:
The significance of the Internal Review given disparities between it and the June 2013 CIA response to the committee study. The Internal Panetta Review summary now at the secure committee office in the Hart Building is an especially significant document as it corroborates critical information in the committee’s 6,300-page Study that the CIA’s official response either objects to, denies, minimizes, or ignores.
Unlike the official response, these Panetta Review documents were in agreement with the committee’s findings. That’s what makes them so significant and important to protect.
When the Internal Panetta Review documents disappeared from the committee’s computer system, this suggested once again that the CIA had removed documents already provided to the committee, in violation of CIA agreements and White House assurances that the CIA would cease such activities.
As I have detailed, the CIA has previously withheld and destroyed information about its Detention and Interrogation Program, including its decision in 2005 to destroy interrogation videotapes over the objections of the Bush White House and the Director of National Intelligence. Based on the information described above, there was a need to preserve and protect the Internal Panetta Review in the committee’s own secure spaces.
Now, the Relocation of the Internal Panetta Review was lawful and handled in a manner consistent with its classification. No law prevents the relocation of a document in the committee’s possession from a CIA facility to secure committee offices on Capitol Hill. As I mentioned before, the document was handled and transported in a manner consistent with its classification, redacted appropriately, and it remains secured—with restricted access—in committee spaces.
<...>
I also want to reiterate to my colleagues my desire to have all updates to the committee report completed this month and approved for declassification. We’re not going to stop. I intend to move to have the findings, conclusions and the executive summary of the report sent to the president for declassification and release to the American people. The White House has indicated publicly and to me personally that it supports declassification and release.
- more -
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=db84e844-01bb-4eb6-b318-31486374a895
If people are going to claim that Obama is responsible for the CIA removing documents, then why isn't Obama responsible for Panetta providing them in the first place?
What's the theory: Obama gave the Senate the documents so they could confirm torture, and then took them back?
If the President wanted to cover up the issue, there would be no investigation, and no Internal Panetta Review. Anything from the CIA would be cleansed of any damaging evidence. That is clearly not the case.
The issue is who at the CIA engaged in this behavior. People are throwing around Feinstein's and Udall's names to make this about the President when both have reiterated that he fully supports declassifying the report.
Senate confirms Caroline Krass as CIA general counsel
By Greg Miller
The Senate on Thursday voted to confirm Caroline Krass as CIA general counsel...Her confirmation had been held up in part by lawmakers angered by the ongoing dispute between the CIA and the Senate Intelligence Committee over committee’s investigation of the agency’s use of harsh interrogation techniques after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
During her confirmation hearing in December, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) voted against Krass’s nomination and accused the CIA of refusing to turn over an internal review of the interrogation program ordered by former agency Director Leon E. Panetta. He also pushed for a statement from President Obama indicating support for declassifying the committee’s 6,200-page interrogation report. Obama did so Wednesday, apparently clearing the way for Thursday’s vote to confirm Krass.
Udall let Krass's confirmation move forward Thursday, but he called for new leadership in the CIA's general counsel's office.
"We need to correct the record on the CIA's coercive detention and interrogation program and declassify the Senate Intelligence Committee's exhaustive study of it, Udall said in a statement. "I released my hold on Caroline Krass's nomination today and voted for her to help change the direction of the agency....The president has stated an unequivocal commitment to supporting the declassification of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report. Coloradans expect me to hold him to his word."
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/13/senate-confirms-caroline-krass-as-cia-general-counsel/
By Greg Miller
The Senate on Thursday voted to confirm Caroline Krass as CIA general counsel...Her confirmation had been held up in part by lawmakers angered by the ongoing dispute between the CIA and the Senate Intelligence Committee over committee’s investigation of the agency’s use of harsh interrogation techniques after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
During her confirmation hearing in December, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) voted against Krass’s nomination and accused the CIA of refusing to turn over an internal review of the interrogation program ordered by former agency Director Leon E. Panetta. He also pushed for a statement from President Obama indicating support for declassifying the committee’s 6,200-page interrogation report. Obama did so Wednesday, apparently clearing the way for Thursday’s vote to confirm Krass.
Udall let Krass's confirmation move forward Thursday, but he called for new leadership in the CIA's general counsel's office.
"We need to correct the record on the CIA's coercive detention and interrogation program and declassify the Senate Intelligence Committee's exhaustive study of it, Udall said in a statement. "I released my hold on Caroline Krass's nomination today and voted for her to help change the direction of the agency....The president has stated an unequivocal commitment to supporting the declassification of the Senate Intelligence Committee's report. Coloradans expect me to hold him to his word."
- more -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/13/senate-confirms-caroline-krass-as-cia-general-counsel/
Roll call: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=113&session=2&vote=00076
66 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
read it.. 'cause you know..
blue blue shill
spouting!
It can't be true if Obama isn't the bad guy.
"group think".. when they're right in the middle of their little group
Whisp
