CIA Eliminates Incriminating Evidence, Destroys Interrogation Tapes

Posted by Steve Benen, The Carpetbagger Report at 7:16 AM on December 7, 2007.

This post, written by Steve Benen, originally appeared on The Carpetbagger Report

Given the last seven years, expectations are already low for the administration that's never seen justice it didn't want to obstruct. But intentionally destroying evidence of a possible crime, in the midst of ongoing legal inquiries, suggests the Bush gang's contempt for the rule of law can't get much worse.

The Central Intelligence Agency in 2005 destroyed at least two videotapes documenting the interrogation of two Qaeda operatives in the agency's custody, a step it took in the midst of Congressional and legal scrutiny about its secret detention program, according to current and former government officials.

The videotapes showed agency operatives in 2002 subjecting terrorism suspects -- including Abu Zubaydah, the first detainee in C.I.A. custody -- to severe interrogation techniques. The tapes were destroyed in part because officers were concerned that video showing harsh interrogation methods could expose agency officials to legal risks, several officials said.

In a statement to employees on Thursday, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the C.I.A. director, said that the decision to destroy the tapes was made "within the C.I.A." and that they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value.

The destruction of the tapes raises questions about whether agency officials withheld information from Congress, the courts and the Sept. 11 commission about aspects of the program.

General Hayden's statement said that the tapes posed a "serious security risk" and that if they had become public they would have exposed C.I.A. officials "and their families to retaliation from Al Qaeda and its sympathizers." [...]

In his statement, General Hayden said leaders of Congressional oversight committees had been fully briefed about the existence of the tapes and told in advance of the decision to destroy them. But the two top members of the House Intelligence Committee in 2005 said Thursday that they had not been notified in advance of the decision to destroy the tapes.

"Millions of documents in C.I.A. archives, if leaked, would identify C.I.A. officers," Mr. Malinowski said. "The only difference here is that these tapes portray potentially criminal activity. They must have understood that if people saw these tapes, they would consider them to show acts of torture, which is a felony offense."

Second, Hayden's argument about congressional oversight is apparently bogus. The leading Republican on the House Intelligence Committee at the time was, according to his spokesperson, "never briefed or advised that these tapes existed, or that they were going to be destroyed," and believes Congress "should have been informed and consulted before the C.I.A. did anything with the tapes." Likewise, the top Democrat on the Committee said she urged the CIA not to destroy any evidence, asking, "How in the world could the C.I.A. claim that these tapes were not relevant to a legislative inquiry?"

Ultimately, the Bush administration hid the evidence from lawmakers, federal investigators, a federal court, and the 9/11 Commission -- and then destroyed it. Just when it seemed this administration couldn't possibly get worse, it gets worse.

Given this report, it's hardly unreasonable for Congress to demand a criminal investigation by the Justice Department of the CIA and anyone in the White House who may have authorized the destruction of evidence. It's a no-brainer -- the Bush administration appears to have committed a crime in order to cover up another crime.

Will Attorney General Michael Mukasey rise to the challenge, or will he be Alberto Gonzales?

Tagged as: cia, torture, bush administration, hayden

Steve Benen is a freelance writer/researcher and creator of The Carpetbagger Report. In addition, he is the lead editor of Salon.com's Blog Report, and has been a contributor to Talking Points Memo, Washington Monthly, Crooks & Liars, The American Prospect, and the Guardian.