Who’s right? The editors of the Chicago Tribune:
As part of the nomination process, Haspel does have to answer for her actions. On Wednesday, she testified publicly before the Senate intelligence committee and addressed key questions about the CIA and torture. The hearing produced no startling revelations about her. Haspel stated that, if confirmed, she would not restart the now-repudiated detention and interrogation program. “I would not allow the CIA to undertake activity that I thought was immoral, even if it was technically legal,†she said.
And what if Haspel were ordered to waterboard a terrorism suspect? We ask because, at various times, Trump has sounded like a fan of “tough†interrogations. But Haspel made clear to the panel she wouldn’t allow the CIA to again embrace what was a desperation tactic.
Spycraft is exotic, at least as portrayed in paperbacks. It’s a coldblooded business that exists to help keep America safe. There are untidy aspects to the profession.
Haspel, who would be the first CIA director in five decades to come into the job after a career in clandestine operations, is also a proven administrator. The Senate should confirm her.
or John McCain:
I believe Gina Haspel is a patriot who loves our country and has devoted her professional life to its service and defense. However, Ms. Haspel’s role in overseeing the use of torture by Americans is disturbing. Her refusal to acknowledge torture’s immorality is disqualifying. I believe the Senate should exercise its duty of advice and consent and reject this nomination.
I don’t agree with Sen. McCain often but on this I’m inclined to agree with him. What do you think?
There seems to be no context in the debate, although plenty of politics and flowering up tough concepts.
It was a post 911 world. She “oversaw†what was approved by the powers that were. She didn’t invent it. And spare me the sudden moral turn, Kamala Posing for the Election Harris, against her. It’s just because she’s a Trump choice and future campaign ads need to be made.
“Untidy aspects??†My god. It’s blood curdling life or death.
Spare me McCains moral preening. What next, no war, or watching an intruder butcher your family in the middle of the night, because thou shalt not kill?
It’s already ugly. It’s already political. But I suspect that in the end a coalition of “safe votes†will be put together.
We executed Germans for that.
Still with the not-torture faction.
Something to keep in mind: we are not in survival mode. We were not in survival mode following 9/11. The survival of the country was never in doubt. We were angry. Right now the only force that threatens our survival is us.
We took the actions we did after 9/11 for political reasons, because we were angry, as a warning to others, and because they were more convenient than other remediations we might have undertaken. We’re still in that mode. We should reconsider.
“Values” are what inform your actions even when they’re not convenient, profitable, or help you socially or politically.
Since the title of your post asks the question of whether Haspel will be confirmed, I’ll repeat what I said in the closing paragraph of my OTB post this morning.
So far, two Republicans — Rand Paul and John McCain — have voiced opposition to her nomination. McCain will most likely not be in Washington to vote against her since he is still recovering from cancer treatment in Arizona.
On the other hand, yesterday Joe Manchin stated that he will support her nomination, as did Maine’s Susan Collins.
Based on these announcements, and assuming no further Republican defections there would be at least 50 votes in support of Haspel’s nomination and 49 against her. That would be enough to confirm her.
Additionally, it’s possible and indeed probable that other red-state Democrats will go along with Manchin — possible candidates in this regard include Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota, Joe Donnelly in Indiana, and, possibly, Jon Tester from Montant. If that happens then there would be more than enough Democratic votes to make up for another Republican defection or two.
Now, on the question of whether she *should* be confirmed, I tend to agree with Senators Paul and McCain, and with Dave. The most distrubing part of Haspel’s record on torture to me is the fact of her involvement in efforts to cover-up the agency’s role in that program. I don’t see how someone who was willing to destroy evidence can be trusted to be Director.
That part sounds like she’ll fit right in with past directors.
This is a fair point but one would hope there would be accountability at some point.
She ran a black site so she shouldn’t be confirmed IMO.
As far as “destroying evidence” goes, I guess it depends. Intelligence is destroyed all the time – it’s not subject to complete and perpetual archiving like some other kinds of government information.
Saith the cretin: “Spare me McCain’s moral preening.”
John McCain was imprisoned and tortured in the service of his country. He might know something about torture. What do you know of service to your country?
Woo. Strong words, sam.
First, let’s get to the root. “Moral†John voted for confirmation of Brennen, Haspels boss when this was going on. So spare me McCains moral preening.
McCain has been running on his service forever. Wears it like a badge. But more recently has been nothing but a media hog and conducted his vindictive campaign against a Trump. Spare me his moral preening.
His torture was a tragedy, don’t conflate it with his character or positions. A personal injustice does not give one license to do anything they want.
You are right, Dave. Execute the whole lot of them.
“What next, no war, or watching an intruder butcher your family in the middle of the night, because thou shalt not kill?”
Total BS. Very sad that you can’t tell the difference between hurting someone who is tied down and unable to respond vs defending yourself and family. All about the tough guy posturing I guess, but then I think you have to be kind of warped to think that it is “tough” to torture people.
More broadly, I think she will be confirmed. She probably should not be, but I do have some sympathy. I think that by conceding that we should follow the Army Field Manual she is tacitly acknowledging that what they did was wrong. She doesn’t want to come and say it since it would be criticizing some of the people working for her. She may also be one of those people who cannot admit that she was wrong. Too bad she couldn’t take that final step to admit what they did was wrong.
Still, even that level of tacit admission is enough that I am not going to have a hissy fit if she wins the nomination.
@steve, I believe the Army Field Manual was changed to ban waterboarding in 2006, but didn’t apply to the CIA until 2009 anyway. As of 2008, waterboarding was “still officially in the CIA tool kit but it requires the consent of the attorney general and president on a case-by-case.”
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/23167004/ns/us_news-security/t/justice-dept-waterboarding-no-longer-legal/#.WvRiVYgvzcs
Drew,
McCain, for all his faults, has consistently been against torture and its use by the United States. That is to his great credit and he opposed it when virtually every other Republican applauded it.
I disagree with McCain on many issues, but I greatly respect his consistency on this particular issue.