CIA Thugs Scream For Mommies -er, Laywers

[Elfdart]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/84572

Attorney general Michael Mukasey's decision to launch a full-scale FBI probe into the destruction of CIA interrogation tapes has sent several alarmed agency employees scrambling to find lawyers. To lead the probe, the A.G. named John Durham, a hard-nosed veteran prosecutor who is assembling a team of deputies and FBI agents. Some CIA veterans fear the move is tantamount to unleashing an independent counsel on Langley. "A lot of people are worried," says one former CIA official, who asked not to be identified talking about sensitive matters. "Whenever you have the bureau running around the building, it's going to turn up some heads. This could turn into a witch hunt."

Awwwwww. Isn't it hilarious that people who took part in water torture (the favored method of persecuting old ladies suspected of witchcraft) are now whining about a figurative witch hunt?

Justice officials say Durham was assigned to investigate the 2005 decision to destroy the tapes—not the activities recorded on them, including the use of waterboarding on Al Qaeda suspects. But at this point, Durham has no formal mandate on the probe's scope, giving him the freedom to expand it if he chooses. "We're going to follow this wherever it leads," says one Justice official, who asked not to be identified discussing an ongoing probe.

On one hand, I think it's sad that the rule of law in our dessicated republic rests in the hands of prosecutors, who are by and large a class of wannabe politicians on the make. On the other hand, I don't see anyone else volunteering to investigate the sadists.

One key figure, Jose Rodriguez, the former CIA chief of clandestine services who gave the order to destroy the videotapes, has retained Robert Bennett, a renowned defense lawyer who represented Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Another potential witness, George Tenet, who was CIA director when the tapes were made, will be represented by former FBI general counsel Howard Shapiro. Roy Krieger, a Washington lawyer who has represented about 100 CIA employees, says that two agency officers have approached him about representation, though neither has retained him yet.

But, but I thought it was going to be a witch hunt. Witches didn't get high-priced, well-connected lawyers.

For the CIA spooks involved, cost is a serious issue. Krieger says legal expenses for each employee could reach "hundreds of thousands" of dollars; the CIA will not foot the bill.

Good.

In anticipation of just such a scenario, however, the agency some years ago began encouraging its employees to purchase special liability-insurance policies from Wright & Co., a Virginia firm that specializes in coverage for government investigators. A Wright spokesman had no response to questions about whether claims have been filed for legal fees in connection with the tapes inquiry. CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano confirmed the agency does not pay its officers' legal bills, but added "only a very, very small subset of agency activities ever become the subject of litigation or investigation."

Mark Hosenball and Michael Isikoff

© 2008 Newsweek, Inc.

Shouldn't the purchase of "special liability-insurance policies" by government agents be construed as premeditation? If they're acting within the law, the counsel for the government would represent them. Buying one of these policies ahead of time is good evidence that the thug in question was planning to break the law all along.

In a pefect world, these thugs would face trial for torturing people*, which ranks right up there with murder, rape and pedophilia as far as I'm concerned. If they get prosecuted for obstruction of justice, it would be half a loaf at best. Beats nothing, I guess.




*and being accessories before and after the fact

[Darth Wong]

I don't understand what the problem is here. The CIA believes that waterboarding is an effective way of extracting information. Therefore, the best solution here is to simply waterboard all of the CIA agents in order to find out what they did, and then send them to prison after reviewing this evidence in front of a tribunal.

[Elfdart]

Sauce for goose is sauce for the gander, and these honking geese need to do the perp walk. What they've done has killed more people than Mohammed Atta's band of murderers.

[weemadando]

I listened to a disturbing story on BBC World the other day about the "homicide" of a prisoner in Afghanistan (the homicide death ruling was made by a US Army coroner).

The interview was segments lifted from Taxi to the Dark Side. Some really disturbing stats in there - I forget the exact numbers but of ~600 deaths in US custody by Iraqi and Afghani people ~150 had been ruled homicides by the US Army coroners. Surely that shows that perhaps the treatment is a little harsh.

And lets not got into the things like people being transported to Gitmo after it was known that they were completely unaffiliated with terrorist groups and innocent of such things.

The case in point in that doco is a well known one - the driver of a cab and 3 passengers detained at Bagram. Its found out prior to the driver's death that they were just "sold" by the local warlord as patsy's for the Warlord's own rocket attacks on the US base. And after this was known was when the 3 passengers were moved to Gitmo. For 15 months.

Any pretense of innocence that the people involved in this want to spout is bullshit.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I don't understand what the problem is here. The CIA believes that waterboarding is an effective way of extracting information. Therefore, the best solution here is to simply waterboard all of the CIA agents in order to find out what they did, and then send them to prison after reviewing this evidence in front of a tribunal.

The difference is CIA employees are american citizens and are afforded the protection of the bill of rights. Pity really...


How I would love to be apart of this investigation.

[CmdrWilkens]

Shouldn't the purchase of "special liability-insurance policies" by government agents be construed as premeditation? If they're acting within the law, the counsel for the government would represent them. Buying one of these policies ahead of time is good evidence that the thug in question was planning to break the law all along.

I actually think you are wrong on this (though on the whole I am laughing at the comeuppance that is on its way). Its the old truth about whether you want the public defender or the high priced lawyer. The special liability insurance is similair to the law-services insurance which is popping up in order to allow individuals to secure the services of lawyers who would normally be beyond their price range. I'm half tempted to get a policy not because I am intent upon committing a crime but rather being in a position of managerial authority (and a male) in a company that predominantly hires females and when half of my direct reporting subordinates are female. Simply put the threat fully exists of a sexual harrasment lawsuit and whether I committed a wrong or not there is no way I would be able to reasonably afford a decent lawyer to defend myself on my salary. So again its just like any other insurance: you have it because you are trying to mitigate risk not because you believe you will need it do to your actions.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I don't understand what the problem is here. The CIA believes that waterboarding is an effective way of extracting information. Therefore, the best solution here is to simply waterboard all of the CIA agents in order to find out what they did, and then send them to prison after reviewing this evidence in front of a tribunal.

The difference is CIA employees are american citizens and are afforded the protection of the bill of rights. Pity really...


How I would love to be apart of this investigation.

Um... so are non citizens under the wording of the document, dipshit.

[Elfdart]

I think he was being sarcastic with the first part.

[Edi]

I don't understand what the problem is here. The CIA believes that waterboarding is an effective way of extracting information. Therefore, the best solution here is to simply waterboard all of the CIA agents in order to find out what they did, and then send them to prison after reviewing this evidence in front of a tribunal.

The difference is CIA employees are american citizens and are afforded the protection of the bill of rights. Pity really...


How I would love to be apart of this investigation.

Just this comment shows that you are utterly unqualified to take part in any such investigation. The Bill of Rights, where it does not specifically mention some right applying to citizens, applies to all people. It makes the distinction about citizens in the amendments that refer to voting, but in all other instances, the term "person" is used in singular or plural so that it applies to everyone. Or are foreigners suddenly not entitled to due process, a fair trial, fourth and fifth amendment protection or the other rights enumerated? I understand that you're supposed to be a police officer, so you should at least have a passing familiarity with the laws you are professionally required to enforce.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I think he was being sarcastic with the first part.

Yeah, I was. My fault for not making it obvious though...