Reply With Quote
Its karma that a State trooper, who has to pull over people, often in the middle of the night risking their lives, shoots his pregnant wife in the head accidentally.
Jesus...
sameA lawyer dogged by scandal, already deemed by a federal judge to have withheld evidence in order to protect a CIA agent from scrutiny, and deeply embedded in the torture program itself, should never in a million years have risen to the top legal post at the CIA. 128 pages of the Senate report are reportedly concerned with false CIA representations to the Office of Legal Counsel. I wonder how many times Eatinger appears in them. Yesterday, DiFi said it was 1600 times in the full report.
The conflict of interest is so massive and obvious here that one has to wonder if anyone at the White House knew what Eatinger’s past was, when he ascended to the job. But it sure seems obvious Brennan did. Which is why, yesterday, he seemed so unsettled. The gig may soon be up – unless the CIA manages to suppress the Senate report past the coming elections. Haste, Mr President. Haste.
Its karma that a State trooper, who has to pull over people, often in the middle of the night risking their lives, shoots his pregnant wife in the head accidentally.
Jesus...
He's well trained professional and immersed in the wonderful culture of safety around guns
So State troopers don't need weapons, and because we got a goof ball that accidentally shoots his wife, this is karma?
Sick mofo...
Your stupidity rears it's head again. You obviously don't know how little range time/safety training officers have, this guy seems to fit the bill. What happened is tragic, yet you find it amusing and call it karma? It's scary that there are millions of other twisted liberals just like yourself.
it's not amusing, it's just more proof how you gun fellators and your 2nd Amendment bull and your guns-as-toys/everybody-must-have gun cause horrible tragedies and are a huge public health disaster.
derail. boutons once again ignores the topic to focus on petty, totally unrelated partisan bs.
Last edited by Winehole23; 03-12-2014 at 03:02 PM.
the coverup spans successive administrations and so goes beyond mere partisanship
Obama's pusillanimity in the face of US war crimes has emboldened a rogue CIA. If he chooses not to declassify the Senate report and the Brennan review, we'll know which side he's on once and for all.
.2 deaths per 100,000 hardly seems like a huge public health hazard, but keep on telling yourself that.
Sorry to derail winehole, back to the topic.
Feinstein, you reap what you sow.
perhaps our representatives now feel a personal stake in reining in an out of control intelligence sector. I guess we'll see.
CIA claims Senate committee went around a firewall to obtain information general staffers were not supposed to see.
The plot thickens.
so the CIA Keystone Kops security aces can't build a reliable firewall?
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/03/13/president-obama-covering-presidencys-role-torture-4-years/
Imagine the Repug EXPLOSION if Obama's Exec exposed the dubya/ head/CIA crimes.
The Obama White House has covered up the Bush presidency’s role in the torture program for years. Specifically, from 2009 to 2012, the administration went to extraordinary lengths to keep a single short phrase, describing President Bush’s authorization of the torture program, secret. Why wait?
All the NSA , CIA crap gets nabbed by the 4th branch of any country wishing to be democratic, let's have a big shout for a free press. Snowden's stuff would have never been seen if not for the Washington Post and the Guardian.
Maybe one day someone can explain to Wild Cobra that RT is not a great source for information that is accurate.
Last edited by pgardn; 03-14-2014 at 10:46 AM.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...wyer-successorThe top CIA lawyer at the heart of a clash between the agency and its political overseers has been replaced, after senators lifted a block on confirming his successor.
Senator Mark Udall, a Colorado Democrat, said on Thursday that he released a procedural obstacle he had placed on the CIA’s nominee for its next general counsel, Caroline Krass, setting up the departure of its acting senior attorney, Robert Eatinger.
honor among thieves and rogues: there's an agreement that a new President will never prosecute the previous President's crimes and criminals
OBAMA, THE CIA, AND THE LIMITS OF CONCILIATION
It is not too much of an exaggeration to say that, in one very important way, the president has lost control of his own government. The current cons utional crisis between the CIA and the Senate committee tasked with investigating its policies regarding torture during the previous administration has only one real solution that is consonant with the rule of law.
Either CIA director John Brennan gets to the bottom of what his people were doing and publicly fires everyone involved, or John Brennan becomes the ex-director of the CIA. By the Cons ution, this isn't even a hard call.
The Senate has every legal right to investigate what was done in the name of the American people during the previous decade. It has every legal right to every scrap of information relating to its investigation, and the CIA has an affirmative legal obligation to cooperate. Period. The only way this is not true is if we come to accept the intelligence apparatus as an extra-legal, formal fourth branch of the government.
That is the choice that the president should give Brennan. Right now. This morning. Nobody is asking for the release of tracking data regarding the current operatives of al Qaeda. This information is being withheld because, during the late Avignon Presidency, the CIA repeatedly broke the law in its treatment of captives and it did so with the blessing of the highest reaches of the American government. That the president has not done this yet -- indeed, that he seems to have thrown his support behind Brennan -- is not merely a mistake, it is a demonstration of the practical limits of the political appeal that got him elected in the first place.
Increasingly, the election of Barack Obama seems to have functioned more as an anesthetic than as an antidote to the criminality of his predecessor's government. His message of conciliation allowed the American people to forget what they had allowed a cabal of bureaucrats and fantasts to hijack their government in the chaos and terror following the attacks of September 11. The president offered the country, as I wrote at the time, absolution without penance. And he put that philosophy into action by declining right at the outset to prosecute, or even to thoroughly investigate, what had been done. What we are seeing today is the final limit to looking forward, and not back.
The CIA, and the rest of the intelligence apparatus of the country, was not reconciled to democracy. They were not brought properly to heal and the American people were not forced to confront the consequences of the terrible abandonment of self-government that, at its worst, the intelligence community represents.
The Senate investigation is really the last chance for even the ghost of a full accounting. (The CIA already destroyed videotapes of the torture sessions ) The apparent interference with the Senate investigation is a cons utional crime of the first order. The president set himself to bring people together. That's a noble goal, and one with which few people would disagree. But it is not the CIA's goal. It never has been. Its long history of crimes and bungling have created a climate within the intelligence community that is anathema to intelligent self-government. The president is the only one who can change that. It's time that he start the job.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politic...brennan-031414
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...-stop-it.shtmlAs the scandal over the CIA spying on Senate staffers charged with oversight of the CIA deepens, it's now come out that the White House was fully aware that the CIA was pushing forward with a criminal complaint against those very same staffers and did nothing to stop it. It's been reported that the White House is standing strongly behind the CIA on this one, and that report confirms some of the serious Cons utional/separation of powers questions that have been raised over this incident.
Having the White House be supportive of the CIA not only spying on its overseers, but then (even more ridiculously) filing a criminal complaint against those same staffers for doing their job speaks volumes about how this White House views Congressional oversight of its giant spying machine. It views it with contempt. It only reinforces how the claims that have been stated repeatedly over the past few months that there is plenty of oversight of the intelligence community are completely hogwash.
http://politix.topix.com/story/11115...make-it-happenAround this time, Senate staffers start to notice that relevant do ents were starting to disappear. Apparently, after the CIA had provided all these do ents for review, it then realized that it had provided too much and tried to pull them back. Since the Senate staffers noticed when some of these files went missing within the 6.2 million-page haystack, one could hypothesize that they were files of potential relevance to the ongoing investigation. If staff noticed them being gone then they were likely relevant. It's at this point when the staffers realized what was happening that things went from a normal story of Congressional oversight to a plot from a Tom Clancy novel.
If the CIA is able to thwart an active investigation by the Senate Intelligence Committee, then there is no oversight of the intelligence branches, and then we truly have a lawless en y within the government, and one that operates almost entirely in the shadows.
When the Senate staffers realized that the CIA was actively thwarting their investigation and deleting do ents, and with the background knowledge that in the recent past the CIA deliberately destroyed tapes of the enhanced interrogation, the staffers decided to take action in their own hands and print out copies of vital do ents before they were deleted - then they sneaked the do ents out of the CIA's secure area.
Imagine Senate staffers taking do ents so classified that the CIA would go to the extent of deleting them from an oversight branch's computer, being printed out in black and white, put into a briefcase, taken in a taxi-cab across Washington, and brought into the Senate building where it was put into a locker in the Senate Intelligence Community's secure location (SCIF). This is, apparently, exactly what happened. It should be noted that the Senate Intelligence Committee's SCIF is an extremely secure location, not merely a random Senate office, access is highly controlled for only those with clearances. There are armed guards protecting access and security cameras. Not just any Congressional staffer can access these rooms. If this SCIF facility was secure enough to likely be the location where the existence of the raid on Bin Laden was disclosed to the Gang of Eight, then it is secure enough to hold an internal CIA review into past behavior. There are a large number of highly classified do ents in these locations.
The printing out of highly classified do ents, removing them from a secure facility and concealing their existence is a truly incredible move by a Congressional staffer who may have committed multiple felonies to protect the integrity of the cons utional process. (It seems like a textbook example of what should be pardonable by the President if these actions were a potential "crime").
sameWhat happened then? Panetta's review was sitting in the safe and the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a preliminary version of their report on the Enhanced Interrogation program, likely relying upon the Panetta Report.
The CIA responded with a 120-page rebuttal, which allegedly was directly contradicted by the Panetta Report. In other words, the CIA's rebuttal was not consistent with the former CIA Director's own analysis. At some point the CIA realized that the Senate Committee had the Panetta report, or at least were aware of its existence. On January 29, 2014, Sen. Mark Udall (D-CO) asked CIA Director John Brennan about the report in an open hearing.
It appears, based on Feinstein's allegations, that at that point, the CIA gained access to the Senate staffers computers to see if they had a copy of the Panetta Report - which they did. (It should be noted that the CIA still disputes this version of events but it's unclear what their version is). According to Feinstein, "The CIA just went and searched the committee's computers."
When this was discovered, the counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency referred the Senate staffers to the Attorney General for potential prosecution. As Feinstein would mention on the floor, this was the same counsel that had authorized much of the enhanced interrogation programs and has potential skin in the game for what the report would look like.
Thus this would lead to a standoff where the CIA was directly going after Senate Intelligence Committee staffers, allegedly obtaining access to their computer system without their permission, and the Senate Intelligence Committee refused to give up do ents that they had "stolen" from the CIA. At this point, Feinstein took to the floor, and took the CIA apart for their actions, which the current CIA Director, John Brennan, now denies.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/...y.html?hpid=z1A report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concludes that the CIA misled the government and the public about aspects of its brutal interrogation program for years — concealing details about the severity of its methods, overstating the significance of plots and prisoners, and taking credit for critical pieces of intelligence that detainees had in fact surrendered before they were subjected to harsh techniques.
The report, built around detailed chronologies of dozens of CIA detainees, do ents a long-standing pattern of unsubstantiated claims as agency officials sought permission to use — and later tried to defend — excruciating interrogation methods that yielded little, if any, significant intelligence, according to U.S. officials who have reviewed the do ent.
“The CIA described [its program] repeatedly both to the Department of Justice and eventually to Congress as getting unique, otherwise unobtainable intelligence that helped disrupt terrorist plots and save thousands of lives,” said one U.S. official briefed on the report. “Was that actually true? The answer is no.”
water boarding isn't torture
-- head, Yoni, etc, etc
CIA spied, Brennan lied:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/01/wo...port.html?_r=1According to David B. Buckley, the C.I.A. inspector general, three of the agency’s information technology officers and two of its lawyers “improperly accessed or caused access” to a computer network designated for members of the committee’s staff working on the report to sift through millions of do ents at a C.I.A. site in Northern Virginia. The names of those involved are unavailable because the full report has not yet been made public.
The C.I.A. officials penetrated the computer network when they came to suspect that the committee’s staff had gained unauthorized access to an internal C.I.A. review of the detention program that the spy agency never intended to give to Congress. A C.I.A. lawyer then referred the agency’s su ions to the Justice Department to determine whether the committee staff broke the law when it obtained that do ent. The inspector general report said that there was no “factual basis” for this referral, which the Justice Department has declined to investigate, because the lawyer had been provided inaccurate information. The report said that the three information technology officers “demonstrated a lack of candor about their activities” during interviews with the inspector general.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
