Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


CIA interrogators fear prosecution

posted at 12:15 pm on December 13, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

They made the mistake of trusting politicians.

For six years, Central Intelligence Agency officers have worried that someday the tide of post-Sept. 11 opinion would turn, and their harsh treatment of prisoners from Al Qaeda would be subjected to hostile scrutiny and possible criminal prosecution.

Now that day may have arrived, after years of shifting legal advice, searing criticism from rights groups — and no new terrorist attacks on American soil.

The Justice Department, which in 2002 gave the C.I.A. legal approval for waterboarding and other tough interrogation methods, is reviewing whether agency officials broke the law by destroying videotapes of those very methods.

The Congressional intelligence committees, whose leaders in 2002 gave at least tacit approval for the tough tactics, have voted in conference to ban all coercive techniques, and they have announced investigations of the destruction of the videotapes and the methods they documented.

“Exactly what they feared is what’s happening,” Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department, said of the C.I.A. officials he advised in that job. “The winds change, and the recriminations begin.”

That’s exactly right, and why I’ve opposed John McCain’s approach to this issue for two years. McCain’s approach, by his own reckoning, would absolve politicians while leaving the interrogators in potential legal jeopardy for the rest of their lives. That’s appalling. A more sensible approach would be to first recognize that torture is illegal, but then leave in the possibility of using waterboarding and similarly mild but proven effective techniques when high value enemy targets are captured. As I’ve argued before, high value al Qaeda terrorists are in and of themselves ticking time bombs, and they are also trained to resist ordinary interrogation techniques. If waterboarding is used on them, that ought to be broached before the president and at least two members of Congress from both parties first. We’re a democratic republic, and should be able to hold our politicians accountable for the decisions made in their name. The present situation leaves the officers who are directly involved exposed while the politicians get to hide, and that’s unfair. But that’s also how it was designed.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

Will contribute to their defense fund.

JiangxiDad on December 13, 2007 at 12:18 PM

If the congress wants waterboarding banned, they should do it honestly: introduce a bill and pass it into law.

RushBaby on December 13, 2007 at 12:19 PM

Most CIA employees are just as much defenders of this country as anyone in the military (I’m an OIF vet btw). The fact that the Dems are more intent to bring our defenders down than our enemies is very telling.

davenp35 on December 13, 2007 at 12:20 PM

Is there any way for Bush to absolve/pardon them, on his way out?

Frozen Tex on December 13, 2007 at 12:20 PM

The President cannot pardon someone that hasn’t been tried and convicted.

gabriel sutherland on December 13, 2007 at 12:26 PM

If the congress wants waterboarding banned, they should do it honestly: introduce a bill and pass it into law.

RushBaby on December 13, 2007 at 12:19 PM

That would involve taking a stance and having b@lls. Can’t do that, now can we?

Is there any way for Bush to absolve/pardon them, on his way out?

Frozen Tex on December 13, 2007 at 12:20 PM

If they’re convicted.

amerpundit on December 13, 2007 at 12:27 PM

I mean, anything that would protect them from being charged with anything in the first place? Or at least be a valid and effective defense?

Frozen Tex on December 13, 2007 at 12:31 PM

So now the lamestream media supports outing CIA agents? Where’s the friggen’ duct tape?!!!!!!!

roninacreage on December 13, 2007 at 12:31 PM

Is there anyone left in the DBM that does NOT work for Al Qaeda?

roninacreage on December 13, 2007 at 12:33 PM

The President cannot pardon someone that hasn’t been tried and convicted.

gabriel sutherland on December 13, 2007 at 12:26 PM

If this is true, pray tell, how did Gerald Ford pardon Nixon for any current or future crimes which may have been committed during the Watergate fiasco?

If memory serves me Nixon was not tried or convicted of anything except by the press.

Somebody tell me if I am wrong.

OBX Pete on December 13, 2007 at 12:35 PM

The pardon

“Now, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution, have granted and by these presents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto Richard Nixon for all offenses against the United States which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from July (January) 20, 1969 through August 9, 1974.”

News2Use on December 13, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Let’s see, these are the ENEMY at time of war. The ENEMY murders women and children and other innocents indiscriminately, and would murder ANY American family in a heartbeat, given the chance. The liberal Democrats and their MSM todies think that we should feel sorry for them and then hate our government…for what, for NOT giving them what they deserve, a quick execution???

All they are actually doing is making me dislike liberal minds even more than I already do, IF that’s even possible.

NRA4Freedom on December 13, 2007 at 12:46 PM

Hmm. Now I’m not so sure. Tom Clancy used a proactive pardon in “Clear and Present Danger” when the charater Ritter is granted a “get out of jail free” letter signed by the President for actions taken to preserve the “national security of the United States”.

Could there already be pardons on paper that have not been announced by the President? Are there even any guidelines that determine when the President must make pardons known to the public? Does the President even have to make them known?

gabriel sutherland on December 13, 2007 at 12:49 PM

Frozen Tex has it exactly right. President Bush should step up to the mic and and grant full pardon to all who have interrogated those murdering war criminals. And if more bad guys need to be pressed hard for info, pardon those interrogators as well. Do it Mr. President. Stop this anti-American congress from rendering us helpless in the face of our enemies.

Zorro on December 13, 2007 at 12:54 PM

Hmmm…. maybe… just maybe… thats the answer…

I don’t think that torture should be up to individual CIA agents… but should be a Command level decision…

Create a system whereby Torture IS illegal… but the President can give a “Pardon” for breaking those laws AHEAD of time…

Anti torture laws are on the books… and its the PRESIDENTS call when they should be bypassed…

Sounds Constititional to me…

Romeo13 on December 13, 2007 at 1:01 PM

Zorro on December 13, 2007 at 12:54 PM

Huzzah and Glory Hallelujah! If only he would…

Frozen Tex on December 13, 2007 at 1:03 PM

Oooppsss… wait… sorry… wouldn’t work…

President would be a knowing accesory to breaking a Federal law… that whole High Crimes and Misdeanors thing could get him impeached…

Never mind…

Romeo13 on December 13, 2007 at 1:03 PM

News2Use on December 13, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Thanks!!

OBX Pete on December 13, 2007 at 1:07 PM

This extends down the leadership ranks of the military as well. Just talk to the guys on the sharp end… they especially don’t trust the politicians to back them up when things go bad. They just shift the blame and go on with their lives… while the ones doing the diry work, taking the risks are hung out to dry.

Usually the chain of command will cover your ass if they believe you were in the right… because they have been there with us or been there before. Generals are like half politicians. The Pol’s have them by the nuts because they control their promotion/selections directly. God help you if the real pol’s get involved. Just ask LTC Chessani how the U.S. Government has our backs…

BadBrad on December 13, 2007 at 1:12 PM

This is a bad as the soldiers being afraid to shoot someone for fear of legal action.

These @!$# people hamstring them and then plast them for not doing their job.

jman on December 13, 2007 at 1:17 PM

If the congress wants waterboarding banned, they should do it honestly: introduce a bill and pass it into law.

RushBaby on December 13, 2007 at 12:19 PM

Hasn’t this been done? I think it’s part of the omnibus spending bill that is going nowhere fast.

In any case, the last time they passed legislation like this Bush issued a signing statement that effectively allowed him to bypass it if necessary.

This is but one example of why conservatives must not sit out this election and give it to Hillary or Obama to teach those darned Republicans a lesson. We need a strong advocate for our national security and defense in the White House. Our lives depend on it.

Buy Danish on December 13, 2007 at 1:29 PM

I don’t think that torture should be up to individual CIA agents… but should be a Command level decision…

Romeo13 on December 13, 2007 at 1:01 PM

That is the case already. Each and every action employed by interrogators comes from the top down. Thanks to interfering oversight committees and scrutiny, they can’t make a move without first writing up specifics for why they are going to try something, submitting it to bosses and getting written permission back.

Much like our soldiers taking fire and not being allowed to engage until they get the OK from someone not even there in the action.

ej_pez on December 13, 2007 at 1:36 PM

ej_pez on December 13, 2007 at 1:36 PM

Here is a quote

…Kiriakou said that each time CIA agents wished to use waterboarding or any other harsh interrogation technique, they had to present a “well-laid out, well-thought out reason” to top government officials. In Zubaydah’s case, Kiriakou said the waterboarding had immediate effect…

The left and the mainstream media have conjured up a narrative that Bush ordered poor CIA agents out to torture against their will when, in fact, the CIA agents “wished” or wanted to apply harsher means to extract vital information and they had to make their case in order to get any go ahead.

Kiriakou said they spent a long time listening to hours upon hours the finer points of islam vs. whatever and it wasn’t until 35 seconds of waterboarding were applied did Zabadaba (or whatever) stop wasting everyones time, cracked and started giving actionable intelligence that saved lives.

Topsecretk9 on December 13, 2007 at 1:48 PM

Between this and throwing our Border Patrol Agents in prison for doing their jobs…….

It’s a wonder anybody still signs up for a domestic agency that is supposed to defend our nation.

San Diego talk radio stations have the recruitment ad for the Border Patrol on quite a bit.

And everytime it comes on, I cannot help but snicker.

I don’t feel good about that snicker, mind you.

But, it happens nonetheless.

Hawkins1701 on December 13, 2007 at 1:53 PM

Topsecretk9 on December 13, 2007 at 1:48 PM

Thanks.
That is what I was referring to.

ej_pez on December 13, 2007 at 2:00 PM

Could there already be pardons on paper that have not been announced by the President?

Are you kidding? These guys will be left twisting slowly, slowly in the wind…

Lehuster on December 13, 2007 at 2:34 PM

San Diego talk radio stations have the recruitment ad for the Border Patrol on quite a bit. And everytime it comes on, I cannot help but snicker. I don’t feel good about that snicker, mind you. But, it happens nonetheless.
Hawkins1701 on December 13, 2007 at 1:53 PM

I’ve heard those as well. I get the “good luck with THAT!” thought every time I hear it.

Patrick S on December 13, 2007 at 3:49 PM

Is there any way for Bush to absolve/pardon them, on his way out?

Frozen Tex on December 13, 2007 at 12:20 PM

For that very reason, the Dummycrats won’t move on them until after there’s a new tenant in the White House.

NightmareOnKStreet on December 13, 2007 at 4:29 PM

I don’t care. While congress is in the position to destroy the lives of the people out there that are defending us, they are never held accountable. They sit in there high and mighty positions overseeing what other did but it does not matter how much they screw up, nothing ever happens to them. Even when the take bribes, hide the money in freezers, lie whatever, they are the only ones above the law. They (as a group) look after the interest of that group and we the slaves are always on the loosing side.

SIJ6141 on December 13, 2007 at 6:39 PM

They should just be glad they’re not border control agents.

Tzetzes on December 13, 2007 at 10:06 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.