Silvestre Reyes: CIA Lied to Congress

I suspect Crazy Pete Hoekstra didn’t really consider that his efforts to escalate the battle between CIA and Nancy Pelosi would backfire like this, but now Silvestre Reyes, the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee, has responded to Hoekstra’s opposition to measures to increase intelligence oversight by stating that CIA lied to Congress.

House Intelligence Chairman Silvestre Reyes has suggested Republicans avoid politicizing the intelligence authorizaton bill later this week in light of what he says is evidence the CIA "affirmatively lied to" the panel.

In a Tuesday letter to his committee’s top-ranking Republican, Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, that was obtained by Congressional Quarterly, Reyes, D-Texas, wrote that the committee has recently received information that reveals significant problems with the intelligence agency’s reporting to the panel.

"These notifications have led me to conclude this committee has been misled, has not been provided full and complete notifications, and (in at least one occasion) was affirmatively lied to," Reyes wrote.

Reyes did not describe or detail the alleged false or misleading statements to the committee.

[snip]

Republicans contend a provision of the fiscal 2010 bill (HR 2701) scheduled for floor action Thursday would modify congressional notification procedures to provide political cover for Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Such briefings are a sensitive political topic, because Republicans have repeatedly criticized Pelosi over what she knew and when about the Bush administration’s use of harsh interrogation techniques and her assertion that the CIA "misled" Congress on that topic. [my emphasis]

Reyes actually gave a date when the Committee discovered it had been lied to by the CIA: June 24, squarely in the middle of CIA’s review of both the CIA IG Report and of the Office of Public Responsibility report on the John Yoo and Steven Bradbury memos. 

"Like you, I was greatly concerned," Reyes told Hoekstra, about what he committee learned on June 24 and another unspecified date from CIA Director Leon E. Panetta. "As you know, I have begun to take steps to gather information on the recent notifications," Reyes wrote. "This may well lead to a full committee investigation. I believe that you share my concern, and I look forward to working on this issue with you."

Is the CIA slow-walking the CIA IG and OPR Reports because they’ll reveal that CIA was lying to Congress? 

In any case, Crazy Pete thought he had an issue that could damage Pelosi’s approval ratings (and it did work, for a time). But it sounds like Reyes is considering a more complete investigation of CIA’s lies, to go along with the one SSCI is undertaking.

image_print
  1. klynn says:

    And if, at any time, “truths” were told only to Repug members… oh my…

    Should we start a Cheney clock to see how long it takes for a public statement?

  2. Arbusto says:

    I know I’m being overly optimistic, and reading tarot cards, but there seems to be a little push back from Dems on the Administration from sternly worded missives to the Prez on trigger vs public option to calling a liar a liar in CIA’s CYA’s and briefings. Maybe I’m just hung over.

  3. bmaz says:

    Boy, you got to get up pretty early in the morning to get anything by Silvestre. Apparently the morning of June 24. what took so long?

  4. Waccamaw says:

    What the spit does “affirmatively lied to” mean? Is that the same as “flat out lied to” or is it some cutesy lawyer talk?

    On the days when I’m trying to figure out if the Dims are managing to accomplish *anything*, it’s hopeful to try to remember that at least they are the committee chairs with whatever power that entails. Still makes me madder than hell to think about that meeting where Dems were left to forage for space in the basement.

  5. rapt says:

    “…because they’ll reveal that CIA was lying to Congress?”

    Lets face it, CIA can get away with lying to Congress. The real cover is for war crimes etc.

  6. JimWhite says:

    Wow, Reyes is just so tough to figure out. During the FISA amendment days, he came out with a wonderful letter pushing back on the lies from the Bush Administration—and then played a central role in passing the abominable bill. Can anyone explain what makes this guy tick?

  7. emptywheel says:

    My read is it’s something like this: “Have you already used these torture methods?”
    “No.”

    “Have you stopped torturing?”
    “No.”

    Stuff like that.

  8. drational says:

    Is it possible this is just related to the briefing timeline and not the IG and OPR reports? There was certainly a lot of he said- she said about the briefing timeline for several weeks after it came out, and it seems possible that folks on the IC might have asked Panetta for clarification of the briefing dates/briefer identities….

  9. alinaustex says:

    Bmaz @ 4,
    You know maybe bmaz buddy Congressman Reyes wanted to take a few weeks to verify that indeed Langley /OSD /OVP were colletively lying to his Committee. This is one big ripening scandal involving all the neo cons acrosss our political /governmental landscape -and we all should be just a little more understanding that this is a big shit storm brewing for all the different actors that wanted this misbegotten illegal Iraq War . I for one will still want to give the good guys time to catch up to the bad guys .
    And isn’t this time frame that Reyes is refrring to about the same time that the VEEP Cheney was personallhy briefing Congress.

    • bmaz says:

      More power to you for being able to view all this crap as something positive that is going to lead to something appropriate as far as accountability. Personally, I see none of the shreds of evidence for that, at best, you do. I have been around the criminal justice system an awful long time, and here and at the predecessor site working on these issues for quite a while too, and it all strikes me as a bunch of politically motivated (and, significantly, political lack of motivation) kabuki jive bullshit.

      I sincerely hope you are right, and all the best to you if you can keep that view; my glasses lost such rose tinting long ago.

      • drational says:

        “my glasses lost such rose tinting long ago.”

        you have eyes? I’ve always pictured you as an amorphous ball of pessimism.

        Not that you have ever been wrong….

        • Mary says:

          So kind of a cosmic, Anti-Tribble, eh?

          OT – Two released after two decades – convicted during the Burge Torture Times.

          Jeh Johnson has issued a press release on behalf of the DOJ, acknowledging that while the men have been released, they remain subject to being disappeared into military “forever detention” with no recourse to prevent being horrically abused or killed in such detention. “After all” reads the release, “we here at the Department of Law remain firmly committed to protecting America at all costs and it’s just so much easier to accomplish if you can disappear people who might have a grudge based upon their prior torture and unjust, unwarranted confinement”

          I guess the way things have been going, I really need to include a /s since it’s not necessarily clear on its face.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        It is possible that this commenter is blowing smoke; we’ve all seen it far too much the past few years.

        But here are some things that sure strike me as reasons for… maybe not ‘hope’, but the possibility that some kind of ’scores will be settled’:
        1. Note Biden’s seemingly weird statement that Israel can ‘bomb Iran’, which the MSM claims is a ‘green light’, yet the more reputable, reliable Juan Cole (and, yeah, even Steve Clemons) say emphatically is actually Biden saying to Israel, “You make a move in that direction and you are absolutely, completely, totally on your own. Technically, as a sovereign nation, you ‘can’ do it, you have the legalistic ‘right’. But think about whether it makes any sense, people.” I don’t recall any such remark or comment from a major US elected leader in my lifetime.

        2. Note that as near as I’ve ever been able to tell, Bush did not so much as look at Cheney on Inauguration Day. And Cheney may have been injured, but it sure looked a lot like Scooter’s antics back when he had to show up in court — on crutches. So we had Cheney in a wheelchair and G.W. Bush didn’t appear to even so much as make eye contact with the man who’d been his Veep for 8 years?! C’mon, that’s bizarre. I got no clue what’s up with that, but something’s up with that.

        3. Take a look at Clemon’s interpretation of Biden’s recent remarks, and then click on his backgrounders from two years ago, in which he was saying that Cheney and his minions were unquestionably trying to force GW Bush into a direct military confrontation with Iran — basically, as Clemons points out, it looked like what we might phrase as ‘intentional, premeditated, criminal conspiracy and insubordination’. The cooler heads: Gates, Condi, McConnell, appear to have been in a silent, back alley knife fight against the CheneyBots who were inflammed with the desire to bomb Iran. That was May 2007.

        4. Note that Gates came in to clean out the viper’s nest at DoD, and at least all that cabal around Rummy and Wolfie: Cambone, Feith, etc were cleared out. (See EW’s superb Ghorbanifar Timeline for more names.)

        5. In a mysterious and still-unexplained ‘incident’ in Sept 2007, so within four months of Steve Clemons’ reports about Cheney basically being insubordinate and trying to manipulate GW Bush into war with Iran, a US bomber with nukes was ‘accidentally’ found on an airfield on its way toward the Middle East. And we’ve never, ever heard about that… that was out of this galaxy weirdness, but not a public explanation ever given… except that Gates later actually fired the asses of some Air Force commanders. When does something like that happen and hit the news? (I have no memory of anything like it having occurred in the past.)

        6. Look at what’s happened with the markets, and with the likelihood that billions have been offshored to accounts controlled by some nebulous mix of drug cartels, Mafiosa, and criminals on every continent. I don’t doubt for an instant that whatever happened at AIG was deeply, corruptly criminal and here’s hoping that enough people got burned that they want criminal penalties. And Eliot Spitzer has repeatedly said that AIG was ‘the heart of the mess’, and he ought to know… so with all the black budgets and black ops you’re not saying that someone put money in budgets where they didn’t belong?

        7. The USAG firings showed up the tip of the iceberg in what appears to have been GOP protection rackets for defense contractors. How that ties in, I dunno. But it suggests that enough people got burned that someone, somewhere must want ‘payback’.

        8. Is the US military really going to roll over like a puppy when a small group of neocons basically sabotage the Joint Chiefs? When Cambone alone can call off investigations of suspicious intel problems? I doubt the military is simply going to ‘forgive and forget’ and send roses to the clowns who got us into this mess.

        Okay, enough items for now…
        I’m just saying that it sure appears that enough people got screwed financially that someone’s going to be putting some dots together.

        There are so many unexplained, bizarre things… but if I could put my finger on one thing that gives me a dull spark of hope, it’s that GW Bush seemed so pissed at Cheney. I’m no Laura Bush fan, but I didn’t see her even acknowledge any of the Cheney’s; maybe she did, but I’m guessing that she avoided even making eye contact. And Bush Sr was behind his son at the inauguration; it’s possible that he greeted Cheney, but the individual who appeared to be most solicitous for the frail, older Bush was — of all people on the planet (!) William Jefferson Clinton. Who literally made sure that Bush Sr got safely onto the plane heading out of D.C.

        Meanwhile, Cheney was off in his wheelchair to a car and NO ONE appeared to show up to say ‘good bye’. I mean there were no Republican Senators, no Congressmen, not a soul (!). His daughter or someone pushed his wheelchair out to a car, and it was almost weird to see the vast emptyness around that scene. It was bizarre.

        So maybe I’m full of sh*t. (Wouldn’t be the first time.)
        But I’m just saying that there have been some very weird dynamics; certainly enough weirdness to suggest that some scores are going to be settled.

        How do you work with a man for 8 years, and then refuse to make eye contact on your way out of town….?
        I suspect there’s a great deal that we don’t know.
        I’m not optimistic.
        But I’m also a believer that if enough people get screwed over badly enough, long enough, they get motivated to clean up the mess.
        Here’s hoping. (And I mean in the legal sense of it all — not vendettas, and not violence, which are futile. I mean the kind of in-depth, clean-it-up-clear-it-out investigations that actually produce renewal and long term change.)

        Here’s hoping.

        Apologies, my comment is waaaayyyyyyyyyy too long 8-(((

        • Loo Hoo. says:

          Geez, I hope you’re right. The nukes over America incident was way scary. And you’re right about Cheney being all on his own at the inauguration. He didn’t go to Dallas for Bush’s reunion party either.

          Really good list of the ugly.

          • Leen says:

            When folks (hell probably half the crowd) at the inauguration started to boo Cheney at first I put my head down in embarrassment for him (Catholic training) and then I thought what the fuck this guy is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, lies, torture, etc etc.

            when a million people are booing you that has to hurt. Well I guess it would hurt if you had any feelings

            Boooing is the least we can do

            • Hmmm says:

              when a million people are booing you that has to hurt. Well I guess it would hurt if you had any feelings

              If I recall correctly, the proper term of art to be used in such situations would appear to be: “So what?”

        • freepatriot says:

          this isn’t as unusual as you might think:

          5. In a mysterious and still-unexplained ‘incident’ in Sept 2007, so within four months of Steve Clemons’ reports about Cheney basically being insubordinate and trying to manipulate GW Bush into war with Iran, a US bomber with nukes was ‘accidentally’ found on an airfield on its way toward the Middle East. And we’ve never, ever heard about that… that was out of this galaxy weirdness

          I can recall at least two times that I’ve heard of loose nuks

          once in the mid 70s, and once near the end of ronnie raygun’s second term

          I can’t pull the details out of my ass (no innertoobz back then) but those are just the ones involving whole nukes

          there are countless incidents where parts of nukes were found in weird places (triggers, MRV casings, fissionable material, etc)

          I got a fondness for stories about lost military hardware, so I remember them for a looooong time

          btw, my favorite was the one about two guys who were driving around new mexico with an F-15 engine in their pickup, lookin for a buyer

          • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

            btw, my favorite was the one about two guys who were driving around new mexico with an F-15 engine in their pickup, lookin for a buyer

            It takes all kinds…
            Did they work for Victor Bout? /s

            Actually, you could take this item out of my list and still have plenty of XtremeWeirdness; surely, at least enough to motivate some parties to want to make sure these asshats are forevermore discredited and in prison.

            • bmaz says:

              And a virtual hubcap prize from the Emptywheel blog is hereby awarded to rOTL for the first mention of Victor Bout in a long time!

              Salute!

        • RevBev says:

          I love your comment….Sr. Bush, James Baker et al. are certainly not Cheney fans. The Iraq war recommendations went along way to condemn all that Cheney was conniving about, including all that contract/Halliburton money. A man without class and without friends.

          • x174 says:

            a man w/o class and w/o friends: reminds me of Rumskull.

            another one of the oh so recent chirpy little birds

        • BoxTurtle says:

          Just goes to show that dinosaurs aren’t extinct, they just devolved into Republicans

          Fixed it for you.

          Boxturtle (Seemed an obvious correction)

  10. Mary says:

    So it sounds from all this that Reyes means lies in addition to the CIA-assisted killing of a missionary’s wife and infant child.

    I don’t think the CIA is just trying to slow-walk the reports, though, I think they want to kill them as best they can and Obama and Panetta are helping that along.

    OTOH, I think you have people like Reyes who are likely willing to hold a lot of stuff back, as long as they continue to have the power to do what Bush did, and pull info selectively over time to use it for political advantage. Why release the IG report now at all, when you can wait, let statutes run, have everything redacted to nothing, but then use the release and the info in it for a PR boost with the base closer to elections next year?

    If Sunni and Shia were Texan for buttered side of bread and unbuttered side of bet, I bet Reyes would get them right every time.

    • Nell says:

      If Sunni and Shia were Texan for buttered … and unbuttered side of [bread], I bet Reyes would get them right every time.

      One of the top ten all-time Maryisms.

      with honorable mention for

      Monica & Kyle’s rise to prominence as the door hitting them in the butt on the way out coincidentally lifted their profiles

  11. bmaz says:

    Why release the IG report now at all, when you can wait, let statutes run, have everything redacted to nothing, but then use the release and the info in it for a PR boost with the base closer to elections next year?

    Please state the case that is NOT what they are doing, if you have one!

  12. BoxTurtle says:

    The CIA lied to congress and they’re treating it as NEWS?!? It might have been news a couple years back.

    Perhaps I’m too cynical, but I see too much dirty laundry on BOTH sides of the asle for either sides leadership to permit this to go beyond the bluster stage.

    Boxturtle (Would make a rule that congress can’t pass more laws until they enforce the ones they’ve got)

  13. Mary says:

    OT – but here’s a question for you bmaz if you have time or thoughts.

    Apparently while Binyam Mohamed was at GITMO, he was beaten pretty badly and pictures were taken of him after, with the picture of him post-beating taped to his door for awhile bc he was too hard to identify with his injuries without it.

    That picture(s) was apparently included in the evidence that was produced by Gov in connection with what was going to be the criminal case they were going to pursue against Mohamed (which was dismissed and he was shuttled away just in time to be off premises at GITMO while Holder was there, so of course no one could ask Holder if he talked to him about his torture claims).

    In any event, Mohamed has now filed saying that the photo is going to be destroyed by the court – since that is required for evidence produced in connection with a case that is dismissed – and that he wants it preserved.

    I’m assuming he wants the evidence preserved in connection with a suit that he has filed or plans to file, but I don’t know a lot about court destruction of evidence produced to the court (probably the pic was deemed “classified” and produced under seal or something like that) with a case that is then dismissed. What do you think is the likely outcome on that?

    Here’s a link to one story:
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl…..hotographs
    and I’ve seen others as well. Is he going to get his picture ya think, or is there not enough there to make a good guess yet?

    • bmaz says:

      Man, I dunno. To the best of my recollection, I never had an issue like that in a Fed case; did on a state case, but all evidence is kept for a long time – at least a year past the expiration of appeal time limits – and then destruct notices are sent out. I will ask a friend who is a prosecutor.

    • bmaz says:

      Mary, can find nothing like that from Fed prosecutor friend. I bet this is under the old Bush kangaroo military tribunal BS and they do make a practice of auto destructing everything in sight.

  14. WilliamOckham says:

    I don’t think Reyes is saying that the CIA lied on June 24, he’s saying that Panetta fessed up to a lie that had been told in the past (almost certainly under Bush).

  15. Mary says:

    Also OT, but I just found this even though it is a couple of years old. It’s an article by Thomas Sullivan, a partner with Chicago’s Jenner & Block, and former United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois.

    And oh yeah, a GITMO detainee lawyer. His piece is very interesting and its release (although it was probably written a few months in advance of that) was around the time of Monica & Kyle’s rise to prominence as the door hitting them in the butt on the way out coincidentally lifted their profiles.

    As Sullivan describes all the bizarre and byzantine procedures and process DOJ briefed him on, as a required part of being allowed to represent the detainees, he is struck at least as much by the demeanor of the DOJ lawyers as by the questionabley sane practices they were requiring and he writes:

    To capture in a single expression the process of obtaining permission to view the alleged classified evidence and visit a client – it’s zany – and the zaniest part is that the DOJ lawyers, although polite, appear to take the process seriously. I can’t help but speculate about their backgrounds, where they came from, what they were taught as children, what law school they attended, and other impertinencies. Or do they simply have a more refined sense of humor than I?

    I think they were just in on a joke that Sullivan wasn’t – that we do actually now have a “Department of Law” that is charged with no duty so sacred to it as covering up Executive branch crime. What they were taught as children would have probably been the answer that would have let him in on the joke.

    And now we have almost a decade – a “generation” of children raised on the Twin Bush/Obama Pillars of Power – that something is only a crime if the President says so, and that a crime is only investigated at the President’s whim – but that those who don’t commit crimes are powerless against a President who wants to kidnap them, disappear them, sexually abuse them, disappear their relatives or children, or kill them.

    Anyway – a digression. It’s an interesting article.

  16. FormerFed says:

    I worked with one of Reyes’ aides in Las Cruces during the Obama campaign. He was a nice young guy and I told him to tell his boss not to believe everything the spooks would tell him. Who knows, maybe he listened!!!

    Anyway, cheers for Reyes.

  17. BayStateLibrul says:

    OT breaking

    Fitzy gets Harris to testify against Blago.
    If it weren’t for Bush’s fucking commutation, Libby would have
    ratted on Cheney (forced by his wife) — my opinion

    “A former chief of staff to ousted Gov. Rod Blagojevich pleaded guilty Wednesday to taking part in a scheme to sell or trade President Barack Obama’s Senate seat and vowed to testify at the ex-governor’s corruption trial.”

    • Leen says:

      During the Libby trial (had the opportunity to attend for 9 days) one day I counted how many times Libby’s wife ran her fingers nervously through her hair (72 times).

      Will never forget when she would come outside the side door of the J Prettyman court house. I swear she and Scooter would strike a pose hold it and the cameras would flash, then they would strike another hold the pose cameras flash. Pathetic really really pathetic

  18. MadDog says:

    OT – Regarding Rove’s testimony this past Tuesday, from the WaPo:

    Former presidential aide Karl Rove sat for a day-long interview with members of the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday and is expected to return for another round of testimony later this summer, according to people familiar with the session…

    (My Bold)

    Also, David Shuster, just now on MSNBC, reported that the next Rove testimony date is by the end of this month.

    The question is whether Rove will beat his own record for testimonial returns (5 times with the Libby Grand Jury).

    Habits are really hard to break.

    • Leen says:

      o.k. lawyer folk ..maybe this has all ready been addressed. But I will ask again. When Rove testifies is it under oath or not?

      if not under oath

      Why did they force Clinton to testify under oath about blow jobs and not the Bush thugs?

      • bmaz says:

        It was not under oath, but is subject to false statements because it was to federal officials. Clinton’s depo was facilitated by Republican assholes in Congress and the right wing hate noise machine, but was actually taken by a private party in a regular lawsuit; therefore was subject to the normal deposition guidelines that call for the deponent to be placed under oath.

      • MadDog says:

        And from the Las Vegas Sun:

        Doug Hampton spoke publicly for the first time today about the affair his wife had with Sen. John Ensign, saying the Nevada Republican continued his pursuit even after intermediaries tried to get him to stop.

        Hampton said that Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and others urged him to end the affair and help the Hamptons pay off their home and move to Colorado. But Ensign was so infatuated that he continued, Hampton said…

        …Hampton discovered the affair when he saw an incriminating text message, he said.

        The families confronted the issue in full on Christmas Eve.

        Still, Hampton said, Ensign continued to pursue Cynthia Hampton with text messages and phone calls.

        Hampton seemed to suggest his wife Cynthia was powerless to prevent the continuing affair…

        …The group, including Coburn, a well-known conservative, confronted Ensign and suggested that the Hamptons needed to be given financial assistance — in the millions of dollars — to pay off their $1 million-plus mortgage and move them to a new life away from Ensign.

        During the confrontation, Ensign agreed to write a letter to Cynthia Hampton expressing remorse, Hampton said…

        …But after sending the letter, which bears the date “Feb. 2008,” Hampton said Ensign quickly disavowed it in a conversation with Cynthia Hampton and continued to pursue her.

        Hampton said that on that same February weekend, Ensign told him, “I’m in love with your wife.”

        Some time later, according to Hampton, Ensign’s wife Darlene Ensign reached out to top Ensign political aide Mike Slanker, asking him to set up Hampton with political and lobbying work…

  19. Mary says:

    More OT

    Judge Walton gets this fun case

    A 13 yo flees war in Tajikistan and (I guess – story not clear) ends up in Afghanistan at some point (or Pakistan – that’s were so many came from) Year later, at 22, he’s shipped to GITMO. While at GITMO, Tajik “intelligence” is allowed access to him and says they can get him out of GITMO as long as he agrees to go under cover in Tajik and be a spy against Muslims in Tajik for them. He said no and apparently we have no case to assert against him, so Obama is planning on … turning him over to the Tajik intelligence who he rebuffed.

    Government lawyers notified U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton on June 3 that they will no longer defend his detention, and want U.S. diplomats to arrange to repatriate him.

    He’s now fighting against that release on grounds that he is in fear of the treatment he will receive.

    At the Justice[LawiswhatthePresidentsaysitis] Department, spokesman Dean Boyd refused to address Abdulayev’s specific claims. Broadly, he said the United States doesn’t send foreigners with a credible fear of torture to another nation.

    roundandroundandround

    • skdadl says:

      Ye gods and little fishes. At what point do we seriously lose our tempers?

      The New York Center for Constitutional Rights, which coordinates Guantánamo legal defense efforts, says captives have claimed they were interrogated by agents from China, Tunisia, Jordan, Libya and Tajikistan.

      Now, look, kids — we can do a lot better than that. We know that the Canadians were there, several times, to talk to Omar Khadr as though he was some kind of insect specimen. It’s on video, all over the internets, and we’ve got lots more in the form of witless emails sent back to HQ (CSIS and DFAIT) at the time. We know the Brits were in and out. We know the Australians were too. What — some fear of listing the closer allies? At one point GTMO was a regular UN of interrogators, interested parties more interested in interrogating for various purposes than in getting their citizens out. Evil on all sides, which is why no one wants to ‘fess up to it now — national security, you know, and we don’t want to damage international relations.

      There is no way that guy should be sent back to Tajikistan. Does the wee man from the Department of Law even know where Tajikistan is, or what they do there?

      What can I say? Go, Reggie.

  20. Aeon says:

    Remember Reyes has caught them doing this before.

    From House Intelligence Committee Report on FY 2008 Intelligence Authorization Act, May 7, 2007:

    Section 423–Review of covert action programs by Inspector General of the CIA

    Section 423 requires the CIA Inspector General to conduct audits of each covert action program at least once every three years.

    The Committee was dismayed at a recent incident wherein the Intelligence Community failed to inform the Congress of a significant covert action activity. This failure to notify Congress constitutes a violation of the National Security Act of 1947. Despite agency explanations that the failure was inadvertent, the Committee is deeply troubled over the fact that such an oversight could occur, whether intentionally or inadvertently.

    The Committee firmly believes that scrupulous transparency between the Intelligence Community and this Committee is an absolute necessity on matters related to covert action. The Committee intends this audit and reporting requirement to act as a further check against the risk of insufficient notification, whether deliberate or inadvertent.

  21. alinaustex says:

    Bmaz @ 17
    Maybe I need to get get rid of some tint from my lenses if President Obama really is going to threaten a veto over the gang of eight vs legitimate intel oversight …

    • bmaz says:

      Heh, fear not, you have company. All of us, or at least most all of us, started out with hope and belief in Obama, even me who, as someone (I think Drational) alluded earlier, am pretty much a pragmatic pessimist. I was never quite as on the bandwagon as a lot of folks, but I was there; only to be quickly and concretely disappointed.

      • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

        Oh, mostly agreed. But there’s a psychic shift and we needed at least that much,

      • Hmmm says:

        I believe I put it thus, way back when: “That man is going to break our hearts over and over again. Vote for him anyway.” Today’s one of those days when it’s particularly hard to stand by that, but stand by it I do. It truly could be worse. And if the health insurance situation is any guide, it looks like we do have some power to change his course, at least some of the time. That is a great treasure.

        • bmaz says:

          Oh, you know I agree; both then and now. Trust me, you would not want John McCain as President under any circumstance ever.

  22. johnhkennedy says:

    I am amazed that anyone is surprised that the CIA Lies to Congress. Lying is one of the major tools of their trade. After one has been there for awhile lying and expecting to be lied to probably permeates everything.

    To get the truth on a regular basis, Congress will have to prosecute a few of their people no and then, such as for obvious violations of our Federal Anti-Torture Laws.

    No matter what Bush’s torture scamers told them, the CIA knew it was illegal.

    Keep the pressure on.

    SIGN THE PETITION
    calling for a special prosecutor

    http://ANGRYVOTERS.ORG

    Over 250,000 have signed
    Join them and call yourself a patriot.

    .

  23. DeanOR says:

    The CIA lied!?! It’s a big part of their job description, but unfortunately they use their dissembling skills with Congress and the public, not just in their intelligence work. I think there are probably some good people there doing important work, but the big picture is that the agency has established itself as a nearly independent secret branch of government with little accountability to anyone.

  24. AZ Matt says:

    From a DKos post: Breaking: Panetta confirms that CIA briefers misled Congress

    Central Intelligence Agency Director Leon E. Panetta has told lawmakers that CIA officials misled Congress “for a number of years” since 2001, according to a letter released Wednesday from six Democratic lawmakers.

    The lawmakers say the CIA also withheld information about unspecified “significant actions.”

    The letter didn’t identify when Mr. Panetta made the statements or to what they referred.

    • eCAHNomics says:

      I’m not sure of the specifics, but I think that Panetta has issued a nondenial denial, repeating tonight his statement that the CIA does not mislead congress.

  25. MadDog says:

    The WaPo finally joins in:

    Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Accuses the CIA of Lying

    The chairman of the House intelligence committee has accused the CIA of lying to the committee in a classified matter, the second time in less than two months a top House Democrat has charged the spy agency of intentionally misleading Congress.

    Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-Tex.), in a letter sent Tuesday to House leadership, said that CIA officials “affirmatively lied” to the intelligence committee when recently notifying the panel about a classified matter. Reyes wrote that this was just one of several recent instances in which the CIA has not fully informed the committee on other classified notifications…

    And yes, the letter (1 page PDF) is finally public.

  26. x174 says:

    thanks for the PDF of the letter, MadDog:

    the last paragraph sounds pretty back-peddling to me, though