Zelikow’s Destroyed Memos

Last night, as I was beginning my catalog of the interrogation reports used in the 9/11 Report, the former Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission was on Rachel Maddow, elaborating on his Foreign Policy article where he revealed how the Bush Administration destroyed his objections to the May 2005 Bradbury Memos.

Anonymous Liberal had a very good take on Zelikow’s story (which basically matches what bmaz said to me via email). The destruction of Zelikow’s memos is clear evidence of criminality.

That’s an incredibly damning allegation. The only reason to collect and destroy all copies of this memo would be in order to preserve, for as many Bush administration officials as possible, a potential defense against later prosecution. If the extent of these activities ever became public and investigations were commenced, the White House wanted to be able to argue that everyone involved relied in good faith on the advice of counsel. That defense would be severely undermined if it could be shown that these officials were warned, by a lawyer of Zelikow’s caliber and rank within the administration, that the legal arguments they were relying on were poorly reasoned and unlikely to be sustained by a court.

This was pure CYA. And it was being done for reasons beyond the potential for political fallout. It was done in order to preserve the illusion of good faith reliance on OLC advice in the event of future criminal prosecutions. This is yet another reason why a special prosecutor needs to be appointed. While I agree with the decision by Eric Holder not to pursue prosecutions against CIA officials who relied in good faith on OLC advice (and did not exceed the scope of that advice), it is becoming increasingly clear that there were people (likely high ranking intelligence officials and people in the White House) who were explicitly warned (likely repeatedly) of the shoddy and highly dubious nature of the OLC’s advice. These folks should not be entitled to any presumption of good faith reliance. They need to be investigated. The attempt to scrub Zelikow’s memo from the record looks to me like an act of criminal conspiracy intended to preserve plausible deniability about the illegal nature of various government activities.

UPDATE: The expunging of Zelikow’s memo from the record is not the only thing the Bush administration has done to hinder the possibility of prosecution. Remember that all the tapes of these interrogations were destroyed or went missing at around the same time. I doubt that’s a coincidence.

Zelikow doesn’t make AL’s point as explicitly as AL does: he says only that they’ll have to explain why they destroyed those memos and doesn’t think about the maintenance of plausible deniability for the torturers. But it’s a good question.

So who’s going to ask that question?

Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

159 Responses to Zelikow’s Destroyed Memos

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 139
  • 140
  • 141
  • 142
  • 143
  • 144
  • 145
  • 146
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 153
  • 154
  • 155
  • 156
  • 157
  • 158
  • 159
Emptywheel Twitterverse
JimWhiteGNV RT @IAStartingLine: PREVIEW: Steve King says it's legal, so I tried to marry my lawnmower. The results & video tmrw AM on Starting Line htt…
40mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @Travis_Waldron @maxwellstrachan ...of NJ statute/diversion program in Rice's offender profile+Intervention intake matrix cousel otherwise?
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @Travis_Waldron @maxwellstrachan I'd like to know what the "experts" cited in the HuffPo piece can point with specificity to in terms....
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @Travis_Waldron @maxwellstrachan Or you can just cite the spokespeople of political lobbies. For my part, I'll stick with those in the field
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @Travis_Waldron @maxwellstrachan Honestly, this is 180º different than what actual trial level DV experts+practitioners I know+work with say
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz #FreeBlago Also, of course is petitioning en banc, he is in no hurry; there's always going to be some base sentence. https://t.co/K3K8oKI7n9
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz When it comes to crim justice, procedural+civil rights concerns, Joe Biden is the same horrible man Roger Goodell is: http://t.co/MJpyiWIfHz
2hreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @kdrum @unorigmoniker Now THAT might actually make America great again.
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @astepanovich Dunno. We should get someone to apply to see what they want. ;p
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel "Act as a senior Agency rep to private sector, particularly for engagements w/cos in info tech business sector." https://t.co/GVLI73mKNL
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel And, as @riffraafx and @HeerJeet noted, this is more evidence GOP is going thru Kubler Ross process w/Trump. http://t.co/Cd8qH1JBjH
2hreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel One thing I'd add to my 5 stages of Donald Trump grief http://t.co/J3HAiONyhr would be this meltdown at focus group. http://t.co/uw8J55DLRH
2hreplyretweetfavorite