Absence of Torture Tape Librarian a Feature, Not a Bug

I joked a few weeks ago, that the CIA needed a dedicated torture tape librarian. Well, it was no laughing matter. The NYT reports that the CIA intentionally destroyed the torture tapes of top Al Qaeda operatives.

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

The videotapes showed agency operatives in 2002 subjecting terror suspects — including Abu Zubaydah, the first detainee in C.I.A. custody — to severe interrogation techniques. They were destroyed in part because officers were concerned that tapes documenting controversial interrogation methods could expose agency officials to greater risk of legal jeopardy, several officials said. The C.I.A. said today that the decision to destroy the tapes had been made “within the C.I.A. itself,” and they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value. The agency was headed at the time by Porter J. Goss. Through a spokeswoman, Mr. Goss declined this afternoon to comment on the destruction of the tapes.

Hmmm. Porter Goss. A partisan hack brought into CIA to destroy evidence. So he wasn’t tasked just to dismantle the agency?

I’m going to just throw some points out that you can think about when you read the article yourself–you really need to read the whole thing because it is breathtaking in its implications.

  • The timing of this leak was clearly intended to have one effect: to make it impossible for Bush to veto the bill prohibiting the CIA from torturing. Now let’s see if it accomplishes that goal.
  • Another note on timing? Paul Clement’s statements at SCOTUS yesterday were not proved wrong within 24 hours, as they were when he claimed, during the Padilla hearing, that we don’t torture. But this works about as well, I think, to make sure the Justices think long and hard about our gulag in Cuba.
  • The Judge in Moussaoui’s case, Leonie Brinkema, is not going to like this one bit; these are some of the tapes government lawyers claimed didn’t exist, and she’s already steaming mad that they misled her once.
  • General Hayden claims the leaders of Congressional Oversight committees were briefed. Who? Assuming they were briefed in 2005, it would be Pat Roberts and Crazy Pete Hoekstra, both up for re-election next year. Were Jello Jay and Jane Harman also briefed? Also–I presume they briefed these folks on the destroyed evidence in 2005, right in the middle of debates on torture. Any wonder why they didn’t brief Congress as a whole?
  • General Hayden claims the CIA stopped videotaping interrogations in 2002. Given the big to-do over declassifying their change in policy on photographing detainees, consider me skeptical.
  • Guess what? AG Mukasey has a mighty big headache on his hands, a clear case of obstruction of justice involving Goss and a bunch of other people. I guess we won’t have long to wait to see whether he’s willing to spike investigations for the Unitary Executive.

[Note, I’ve been making running updates, so this has changed.]

image_print
    • eCAHNomics says:

      Wow. This is huge. The timing coming right on the heels of the NIE, is interesting to say the least.

      Very good point. I said the day the NIE was realesed, it was the sound of a dam breaking. This is part of the flood. We could be in for a lot of news. Get the popcorn popper ready.

  1. MadDog says:

    EPU’s on the previous thread, but more apapro for this one:

    Wrt to the destroyed “Torture Porn:

    The C.I.A. said today that the decision to destroy the tapes had been made “within the C.I.A. itself,” and they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value. The agency was headed at the time by Porter J. Goss.

    Shorter Porter: “When Viagra won’t do…”

    • MarieRoget says:

      Wrt to the destroyed “Torture Porn:

      The C.I.A. said today that the decision to destroy the tapes had been made “within the C.I.A. itself,” and they were destroyed to protect the safety of undercover officers and because they no longer had intelligence value. The agency was headed at the time by Porter J. Goss.

      Shorter Porter: “When Viagra won’t do…”

      And these boys do need them some little pills. I remember when my daughter & I were first watching the news together & Gitmo info was just starting to come out via MSM in dribs & drabs.

      She turned to her dad, who was visiting us when we watched, & the realization of what this was & meant began to sink in. Natalie said, “They’re making their jack off videos, dad, mom. This is how they get off, don’t you guys get that. They need this.”

      Those vids are out there to be had. Believe it, the copies are outstanding- didn’t go into the ether. Too much nasty fun was given to those who wanted & allowed it, too many places it is still stored. Sorry to be graphic.

      TBoggers, take note- we say shit when we’ve had a mouthful, just like y’all.

  2. Peterr says:

    I’m thinking that there are some folks at Langley who are going to get lumps of coal in their stockings from Judge Brinkema this Christmas. Maybe the White House, too.

    She’s making a list, and checking it twice . . .

    • emptywheel says:

      Well, there’s the strong likelihood that the “missing” tape from his interrogation was not missing by accident.

      But then we already knew that. The key will be if they’ll admit to it.

  3. MadDog says:

    EW said: “General Hayden claims the CIA stopped videotaping interrogations in 2002. Color me skeptical.”

    Knowing this Administration’s fondness for verbal misdirection, one could reasonably infer that they’ve moved on to Digital Imaging.

    Who needs videotape when our “Get Smart” combo shoe/cellphone will take yer picture jest fine.

    • eCAHNomics says:

      My first thought was that no video tape has existed solely as an actual video tape for a long time. Did they really NOT put those tapes on their computer system so that other interested parties could have access to them? And if they were ever put on a computer, they’re probably not really gone.

      • MadDog says:

        My first thought was that no video tape has existed solely as an actual video tape for a long time. Did they really NOT put those tapes on their computer system so that other interested parties could have access to them? And if they were ever put on a computer, they’re probably not really gone.

        Though some (not you) might think my comment “light-hearted”, tis not the case. The odds are very high that the Administration’s legal beagles “parsed” Mikey’s words parsimoniously and wery, wery carefully!

        And the odds are very high such video imagery still exists in digital form.

        Check on the wery, wery hard drive in Deadeye’s bunker. Or on the laptop under his mattress. Ask Lynne, if you need directions.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      The last “tape” they used was the duct tape on the White House’s basement vents. Digital recording media probably replaced tapes quite some time ago. But what Gonzales-like parsing. Wholesale deception without “lying”. The Bush administration has redefined public service and leadership by the standards of Madison Avenue hypesters and criminal defense attorney parsing.

  4. earlofhuntingdon says:

    It takes enormous resources, probably millions of dollars and dozens or hundreds of personnel, to identify, find, arrest or kidnap and secretly squirrel away a mid- or high-level suspect. And then interrogate them based on traditional and untried methods.

    What, then are the odds that such interrogations – spanning months – wouldn’t be recorded, with tapes and disks watched and poured over, again and again, by dozens of interrogators, analysts, operations managers and senior officials? Watched for data points, clues, signals, evidence that methods are or aren’t working. I think the odds are zero.

    Which means that not only is Mr. Bush’s leadership team lying about one more thing, they imagine that they’re supposed to.

  5. emptywheel says:

    Here’s a question: YOu think one of the torture memos (the one we’ve never seen from 2002, for example) required videotapes? If so, do you think that’s one of the reasons why we never get that?

    Also, did the destruction of the videos precede or neatly coincide with Gonzales’ secret torture memos as AG?

  6. looseheadprop says:

    We will be positing questinsfor days. This raises so many.

    Oh, BTW, I smell Pulitzer. Really nice job guys. This is what newspaering is supposed to be about, getiing info out to inform the citizenry.

    I love to smack your sort around when you get it wrong, let me give you a deep repsectful bow, at times like this when you get it so right.

    Bravo!

  7. radiofreewill says:

    I wonder if those specific tapes were destroyed because it was known by a number of people that Bush had watched them?

    Kind of like it would be if Bush gathered up a bunch of Bush-Abramoff pictures and destroyed them, while claiming privacy over the White House Visitor Logs, to hide the connection.

    Where are the ‘chain of custody’ control logs for those tapes? Were they destroyed, too?

  8. looseheadprop says:

    Speaking of neatly coinciding

    Is this why Tenent risigned? B/C he didn’t want to get caught destroying evidence?

    So, they made Goss do it

    • emptywheel says:

      Timing’s kind of off–because he resigned in June 2004, and these probably weren’t destroyed until mid-2005 (based on teh article’s assertion that they were destroyed during Congressional and legal debates on torture).

    • Peterr says:

      Well, I suspect we’re going to need a lot more detail about the missing and reappearing tapes that came out in the Moussaoui case.

      I wouldn’t be entirely surprised to discover that the Times has a bit more info that they’re holding back, so they can publish another piece tomorrow or Sunday.

      The Times asked Hayden to comment in time for a Friday article, but Hayden responded by telling the story not to the Times but to the CIA, thus trying to ruin their scoop. IIRC, he’s done that before, but I can’t recall when.

      If the editors at the Times remembered that previous event, they might have broken their story into two pieces, to retain one as a followup scoop.

      Or I could be wishing for the moon.

  9. looseheadprop says:

    I’m thinking that why the story about the Moussaoui case tapes kept changing.

    Brinkima is not somebody you wnt to lie to. At all.

  10. looseheadprop says:

    You know when Lichtbau breaks a story, there’s often a couple days of follow up with more/better details. He doesn’t shoot his whole (ahem) all in the first story.

    Wonder what tomorrow’s Times will have?

    • emptywheel says:

      Well, I noticed there was no quote from Brinkema. She might go right ahead and write some kind of opinion. But Brinkema’s reaction is going to be worth at least once story.

      I’ve only read about the woman, but she is the perfect judge to play this correctly I think. (I hope.)

      • looseheadprop says:

        Is there a motion pending before Brinkima? Otherwise why would she write an opinion.

        There is a thing called sui spontemotion, which means on the judges own “spontaneous” motion, but…..?

        Sui spontemotion for contempt? IIIIiiii don’t know. Not withut at least calling them in to ask them to explain themselves. SHe has a reputation for a proper judicial temperament

        • eCAHNomics says:

          Do you have a good reference on “judicial temperament?” IANAL and I hear that phrase tossed around from time to time. It sounds pretty touchy-feely to me, but you use it in a context that makes it sound more substantive.

        • Peterr says:

          Is there a motion pending before Brinkima? Otherwise why would she write an opinion.

          There is a thing called sui spontemotion, which means on the judges own “spontaneous” motion, but…..?

          Sui spontemotion for contempt? IIIIiiii don’t know. Not withut at least calling them in to ask them to explain themselves. SHe has a reputation for a proper judicial temperament

          The link under Marcy’s second bullet point above talks about another pending case where the defendant’s lawyer has various pending motions, all bearing on this fishy smell emanating from the CIA.

      • looseheadprop says:

        Judges cannot comment on pending litigation and are heavily discouraged from commenting on any of their own cases no matter how old

  11. eCAHNomics says:

    One thing that puzzled me about the Iran NIE is why there are still analysts left in the CIA who are willing to stand up to power. I thought that it was Goss’s job to purge them, along, we now find out, with the tapes, and probably a whole buncha other stuff.

    I figured out in the summer of 05 that W was going to destroy all the incriminately records from his Admin. As we weren’t going to find out about this for years to come, I didn’t bother trying to figure out its full scope. Of course, it would involve all the Cabinet Depts, esp Justice. But I didn’t think about CIA at the time. Perfect.

    • bobschacht says:

      “One thing that puzzled me about the Iran NIE is why there are still analysts left in the CIA who are willing to stand up to power. I thought that it was Goss’s job to purge them, along, we now find out, with the tapes, and probably a whole buncha other stuff.”

      Several years ago, no one (Tenet) was willing to stand between Cheney/Libby/Addington and the CIA agents to provide cover. Now, I think, their new directors have begun to shield their staff from Cheney’s gunslingers. But I’m guessing.

      Bob in HI

  12. looseheadprop says:

    I wonder if they will rpint the text of the Hayden letter tomorrow? That would be a good place to look for signals buried in plain site. best way for co conspirators to communicate? In public!

  13. Rayne says:

    Good God. Is this another time line waiting to happen, yet another opportunity to time travel through the criminal behavior of the past before we can move ahead? Feel like this is just one massive CSI investigative assignment, nothing but reconstruction…

  14. looseheadprop says:

    There are in NYS Rules of Judicial Conduct. They are like the Lawyer’s Disciplinary Rules, sometiems calle dhte Cannons of Ethics, only for judges.

    Even more than that, ther is this sortof touchy feely thing. I spent years siitng on screenining committees vetting potential judges. In it’s best sense, it a person who if fair, temperate, not prone to fly off the handle, who thinks things through carefully before acting–yet does not hestitate when action is called for.

    Thinks before speaking, tends to be a bit reserved. Someone with discretion, not a gossip. A high minded person.

    • looseheadprop says:

      I think Judge Walton displayed a great example of Judicial Temperament during the pre-trial, trial, and sentenecing phases of Libby

    • eCAHNomics says:

      Thanks. I should save your comment somewhere on my computer, as I’m sure I’ll have need of it in the future. The problem is, I won’t remember that I saved it, or, if I remember, where I saved it!

      • bobschacht says:

        “Thanks. I should save your comment somewhere on my computer, as I’m sure I’ll have need of it in the future. The problem is, I won’t remember that I saved it, or, if I remember, where I saved it!”

        Google Search is your friend. It will search your hard drive, too.

        Bob in HI

  15. randiego says:

    The reason for the destruction sounds fishy too. I see video with people’s faces obscured electronically every day on the news.

    • MadDog says:

      The reason for the destruction sounds fishy too. I see video with people’s faces obscured electronically every day on the news.

      I think this paragraph from the NYT better suits the rationale for the destruction:

      They were destroyed in part because officers were concerned that tapes documenting controversial interrogation methods could expose agency officials to greater risk of legal jeopardy, several officials said.

  16. emptywheel says:

    Agree, the reason for destroying them sounds fishy.

    But then if Hayden had said, “we had to destroy the tapes after fucking Goldsmith revoked Yoo’s terror memo so no one could be prosecuted,” that would make it easier for Muksaey to hold them responsible.

    Though to be honest, I could imagine there being some kind of agreement on the part of some in DOJ (meaning AGAG, pretty much) to destroy them before Goldsmith’s terror revocation (though, again, the timing’s off–that was in 2004).

    Also, remember this is right when Comey resigns, presumably, summer 2005. LHP, you think Comey would approve of destroying these tapes?

    • MadDog says:

      And let us not forget that in the final rump session of the Repug-owned Congress in October 2006, they passed the infamous DTA legislation that provided “retroactive immunity” from prosecution relating to detainee “interrogation” techniques.

  17. Peterr says:

    From the FDL thread, courtesy of CTuttle:

    Fitzmas…

    After her hour-long speech and question-and-answer session, Plame dropped one bombshell almost casually.

    She said a lawyer had called her just before her talk began and told her that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald had agreed to turn his transcripts of interviews with Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over to U. S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who is known for his relish for investigating wrongdoing by Republicans.

    Plame said she didn’t know whether the Bush administration would allow the transcripts to be sent to Congress.

    Yee-haw! Pass the popcorn…

    http://www.projo.com/news/cont…..7da2e.html

    • Peterr says:

      I think this time it was Christy’s turn to go on vacation when all kinds of juicy stuff hits the fan.

      Last time, IIRC, it was Marcy’s turn.

      *g*

    • eCAHNomics says:

      Takin’ a couple of weeks vacation to do Christmas stuff with her family. She sure picked a bad time to be absent. Things a crackin’.

      • behindthefall says:

        In response to behindthefall @ 50

        Takin’ a couple of weeks vacation to do Christmas stuff with her family. She sure picked a bad time to be absent. Things a crackin’.

        I admire her fortitude if she’s been able to keep her ‘puter off all this time! If it’s been on and she’s STILL been able to keep away from the keyboard, well, then that’s even more amazing.

    • LS says:

      Oh, my…

      “She said a lawyer had called her just before her talk began and told her that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald had agreed to turn his transcripts of interviews with Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over to U. S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who is known for his relish for investigating wrongdoing by Republicans.”

      • selise says:

        In response to CTuttle @ 55
        Oh, my…

        “She said a lawyer had called her just before her talk began and told her that special prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald had agreed to turn his transcripts of interviews with Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney over to U. S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., who is known for his relish for investigating wrongdoing by Republicans.”

        something i noticed earlier today, which seemed quite strange – for the first time i can remember, there are no house oversight and government reform committee hearings on their schedule… usually there are quite a few. my thought this morning was that they were winding down before the winter recess, or that something big was up.

        or it’s all a coinkydink.

    • MadDog says:

      Washington post version up now:

      CIA Destroyed Tapes of Harsh Interrogations

      From that linky:

      …Hayden wrote. “So, on its own, CIA began to videotape interrogations.”

      ~snip~

      The recordings stopped after the CIA “determined that its documentary reporting was full and exacting, removing any need for tapes,” Hayden wrote.

      I’d still bet on this being a “parsed” statement wrt “videotaping”. And the reference to “documentary reporting” suggests more than just a stenographer taking down the screams of pain or gurgles of drowning.

      FWIW and YMMV *g*

  18. behindthefall says:

    “I’m pleased that they have some gumption and have pushed back” against the Bush administration, which has often pointed to Iraq as a rouge nation that is developing a nuclear arsenal, Plame told a packed house on campus last night .

    Oh Lordy, the ProJo is at it again: quoted from their website linked to above we have Iraq instead of Iran, and a new category of foreign land, the “rouge” nations. What are they, Communists making it up as they go along?

    • LS says:

      I think the article meant “Iran” (rogue nation), it seemed to be a typo to me, but maybe she meant Iraq…

  19. Slothrop says:

    Tapes like that never really get destroyed. Someone has copies somewhere and we’ll see them sooner or later. Guaranteed.