Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Justice Department Launches Criminal Probe Over Destroyed CIA Tapes

Posted by Looseheadprop , Firedoglake at 12:07 PM on January 2, 2008.


Oops, did someone at the CIA forget that the 9/11 Commission kept records?
24mukasey.190.1
Mukasey

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

UPDATE: John Conyers wants special counsel to investigate CIA torture tapes

BREAKING: AP via MSNBC reports that the DOJ has opened a criminal investigation regarding the destruction of the CIA interrogation tapes. As LHP points out clearly below, Mukasey has some substantive conflicts on this issue -- which raises a whole host of questions, such as the ones Glenn raises here, about the DOJ investigating this that ought to be answered, and soon. More news as we get it on this, meanwhile some exceptional analysis from LHP on obstructive behavior with the 9/11 Commission. -- CHS

Today's NYTimes Opinion section had an "Op-Ed" that is short on opinion and long on facts, it even has a time line of sorts. You know how I love time lines. This Op-Ed was authored by Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton the bi-partisan co-chairs of the 9-11 Commission and, boy, does it call bulshit on the Georges: Tenet and Bush!

A little background:

MORE than five years ago, Congress and President Bush created the 9/11 commission....Soon after its creation, the president's chief of staff directed all executive branch agencies to cooperate with the commission.

The commission's mandate was sweeping and it explicitly included the intelligence agencies. But the recent revelations that the C.I.A. destroyed videotaped interrogations of Qaeda operatives leads us to conclude that the agency failed to respond to our lawful requests for information about the 9/11 plot. Those who knew about those videotapes -- and did not tell us about them -- obstructed our investigation.

Well, THAT's quite the opening salvo!

When the press reported that, in 2002 and maybe at other times, the C.I.A. had recorded hundreds of hours of interrogations of at least two Qaeda detainees, we went back to check our records. We found that we did ask, repeatedly, for the kind of information that would have been contained in such videotapes

Oops, did someone at the CIA forget that the 9-11 Commission kept records?

Beginning in June 2003, we requested all reports of intelligence information on these broad topics that had been gleaned from the interrogations of 118 named individuals, including both Abu Zubaydah and Abd al Rahim al-Nashiri, two senior Qaeda operatives, portions of whose interrogations were apparently recorded and then destroyed....Agency officials assured us that, if we posed specific questions, they would do all they could to answer them.

So, in October 2003, we sent another wave of questions to the C.I.A.'s general counsel. One set posed dozens of specific questions about the reports, including those about Abu Zubaydah. A second set, even more important in our view, asked for details about the translation process in the interrogations; the background of the interrogators; the way the interrogators handled inconsistencies in the detainees' stories; the particular questions that had been asked to elicit reported information; the way interrogators had followed up on certain lines of questioning; the context of the interrogations so we could assess the credibility and demeanor of the detainees when they made the reported statements; and the views or assessments of the interrogators themselves.

The general counsel responded in writing with non-specific replies. The agency did not disclose that any interrogations had ever been recorded or that it had held any further relevant information, in any form. Not satisfied with this response, we decided that we needed to question the detainees directly, including Abu Zubaydah and a few other key captives.

In a lunch meeting on Dec. 23, 2003, George Tenet, the C.I.A. director, told us point blank that we would have no such access.

So, our intrepid Commissioners tried to go over Tenet's head to get the info.

A meeting on Jan. 21, 2004, with Mr. Tenet, the White House counsel, the secretary of defense and a representative from the Justice Department also resulted in the denial of commission access to the detainees. Once again, videotapes were not mentioned.

This led the Commission to have sufficient misgivings that they included a CYA in the report:

So the public would be aware of our concerns, we highlighted our caveats on page 146 in the commission report

So, let's get this straight. At the President's request, Congress created the 9-11 Commission, then the President's own Executive Branch and its agencies willfully and "in your face mutha" withheld information and obstructed the very investigation that the President himself had requested.

If this is not a total kick in the pants to Congress and the American people, and to the friends and relations that we New Yorkers lost when the towers collapsed, I don't know what is.

I don't know if AG Mukasey can actually investigate this because of his obvious conflict of interest, but you know who absolutely can? And who should? Yep, the very branch of government who created the 9-11 Commission and gave it the power to investigate. Yo! Congress! Enough with the recessing already--get back to work! Or at least appoint a Special Prosecutor, 'cause fellas? According to the DOJ Criminal Resource manual this might be a violation of 18 USC Section 1505 and maybe 1515 as well. Oh, and then there is Section 1001, and.......................

Well, you get the drift. The closing graph from Kean and Hamilton:

As a legal matter, it is not up to us to examine the C.I.A.'s failure to disclose the existence of these tapes. That is for others. What we do know is that government officials decided not to inform a lawfully constituted body, created by Congress and the president, to investigate one the greatest tragedies to confront this country. We call that obstruction.

[ emphasis in all quotes, mine]

Digg!

Tagged as: cia, torture, hamilton, 9/11 commission, justice department, tenet, mukasey, kean

Looseheadprop is a regular blogger for FireDogLake


Hitler, Darwin and the Sasquatch
They're all inter-related, you know.
Post by General JC Christian. July 9, 2009.
After Casting Sole No Vote on Slavery Memorial, Rep. King Keeps Digging Deeper
This is one contorted excuse.
Post by Steve Benen. July 9, 2009.
Airing of Grievances: Right-Winger Incensed over 'Commie's' Jab at 'Saturday Night Fever'
Oh, and Pinochet was a good guy, damnit!
Post by Roy Edroso. July 9, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Pants on Fire!
Posted by: ankhet on Jan 2, 2008 1:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wasn't there a fire in Buckshot Dick's office recently? Anybody ever check what all got burned? The coincidence is too weird...unless he was trying to light a yule log and missed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pants on Fire!
Posted by: ankhet on Jan 2, 2008 1:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wasn't there a fire in Buckshot Dick's office recently? Anybody ever check what all got burned? The coincidence is too weird...unless he was trying to light a yule log and missed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oops, sorry!
Posted by: ankhet on Jan 2, 2008 1:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Accidentally doubled my pleasure!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just A Show
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jan 2, 2008 2:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The DOJ "investigation" will all be a show, with very little actual investigating -- and the department will, surprise surprise, find no wrong-doing by the Executive Branch. But meanwhile, the DOJ will tell Congress to back off with its own investigation because the DOJ doesn't want its investigation to be hampered or interfered with, or so they say, by Congress' investigation.
Congress should, but they won't, just tell the DOJ to go f*** itself, for the Congress WILL do its own investigation, like it or not, Bushies.
Again, I say Congress SHOULD, but they won't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Just A Show Posted by: willymack
there's too much "learned helplessness" from progressives--you'd think that history had indeed ended
Posted by: Suzon on Jan 3, 2008 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey, it's just as true for the Neocons as for the rest of us that life is what happens while you're making other plans.

That fact that W's approval ratings have tanked over time shows that spells don't last forever, even with Murdoch's help.

Reality does have a way of setting in. The young man or woman in your neighborhood who came back from Iraq in a coffin (or maybe in a body bag inside of a coffin) or blind and disfigured or in a wheelchair. The house that your friends owned being repossessed. Your own lack of health insurance. Driving by strip mines or breathing in pollution. Experiencing unwarranted limitations of your civil liberties.

More and more people will begin to see the light and want to restore an America which is more a friend to its people and the world than the one we have now.

This story may be a genuine breakthrough, folks. Remember the Congressional hearings which clobbered Joe McCarthy! Congress critters do have hind legs...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

These words are already imbedded, irritrievable, as in cement
Posted by: johnjmccarthy on Jan 3, 2008 7:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush, et al, (those who carried out the war crimes should have known better) might as well be twisting in the wind, in normal times. However, we all know the wink and nod program is in effect.

"Just following orders" was ruled out by the Inernational War Crimes Tribunal "in our names".

Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson was appointed by President Truman to be the U.S. Representative at the Nurember Internation War Crimes Tribunal in 1945.

His opening remarks to the Jury included: "The standards by which we judge these defendants today are the standards by which we shall be judged tomorrow."

Well, folks, tomorrow is today!

Mr. Justice Jackson, the United States prosecutor at Nuremberg, stated: "If certain acts in violation of treaties are crimes, they are crimes whether the United States does them or Germany does them, and we are not prepared to lay down a rule of criminal conduct against others which we would not be willing to have invoked against us."

Then we hanged the defendants.


The Nurenberg Principles.

Principle I

Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefore and liable to punishment.

Principle II

The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.

Principle III

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.

Principle IV

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.

Principle V

Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.

Principle VI

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
(ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
(b) War Crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
(c) Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.

Principle VII
Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ho ho ho
Posted by: Doubtom on Jan 3, 2008 12:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tried hard to stifle the belly laugh when I read that the DOJ was launching an investigation into "possible illegal activity" by any agency of this administration. I didn't make it, and after I managed to stifle the flow of milk from my nose, I was led away from my puter while babbling incoherently. I have since been released on my own recognition but had to promise to install a BS detector on my puter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ho ho ho
Posted by: Doubtom on Jan 3, 2008 12:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tried hard to stifle the belly laugh when I read that the DOJ was launching an investigation into "possible illegal activity" by any agency of this administration. I didn't make it, and after I managed to stifle the flow of milk from my nose, I was led away from my puter while babbling incoherently. I have since been released on my own recognition but had to promise to install a BS detector on my puter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]