By Julian E. BarnesSen. Richard Durbin says Congress should investigate whether Cheney ordered the counter-terrorism program not be disclosed to lawmakers. Republicans counter that critics are undermining the CIA.
Reporting from Washington -- Democratic lawmakers today criticized former Vice President Dick Cheney for allegedly ordering a CIA counter-terrorism program be kept secret from congressional leaders, as a top senator called for an investigation.
Although Republican senators were far more circumspect, some GOP lawmakers acknowledged the White House should have briefed Congress on the secret program.
At least two Democratic senators said they believe the Bush administration's failure to inform Congress about the intelligence program violated the law. Although it is unclear how wide an investigation lawmakers would like to see, the latest controversy could add fuel to calls for a broader look into the CIA's relationship with Congress during the Bush administration.
There have been increasing criticisms by congressional Democrats -- in particular House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) -- that the CIA misinformed Congress about key elements of its now-canceled harsh interrogation program.
Republicans, who have attacked Democrats for criticizing the CIA, probably will be dead set against any such probe.
There have been increasing criticisms by congressional Democrats -- in particular House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) -- that the CIA misinformed Congress about key elements of its now-canceled harsh interrogation program.
Republicans, who have attacked Democrats for criticizing the CIA, probably will be dead set against any such probe.
Today, Republicans uniformly criticized Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. for reportedly considering the appointment of a special prosecutor to look into accusations that CIA interrogators exceeded the rules laid out by the Bush administration's Justice Department when using abusive techniques against terrorism suspects.
While Democrats expressed support for Holder, some lawmakers continued to push their own alternative plans to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by the Bush administration.
But Democrats were united in condemning Cheney for allegedly ordering the CIA not to reveal details of a still-secret intelligence program.
CIA Director Leon E. Panetta ordered the program halted shortly after learning about it, then immediately called special sessions with lawmakers to discuss the terminated initiative.
Sources have refused to provide any details about what the program involved or what it was meant to achieve. It was put in place in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, but never became fully operational.
Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Panetta had told congressional leaders that Cheney had ordered the agency to withhold details of the program from Capitol Hill.
Feinstein said it was a "big problem" that the congressional intelligence committees were not briefed on the program.
"I think if the intelligence committees had been briefed, they could have watched the program, they could have asked for reports on the program, they could have made judgments about the program as it went along," Feinstein said. "That was not the case because we were kept in the dark. That is something that should never happen again."
Although the law requires that congressional committees be "kept fully and currently informed" on intelligence activities, there is some latitude for both highly sensitive programs and routine ones.
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), the Senate's majority whip, told ABC's "This Week" that Congress should investigate whether Cheney or others ordered that the program not be disclosed to lawmakers.
The existence of secret programs can be protected by congressional leaders, Durbin said. Not disclosing the program, he added, violated the constitutional system of checks and balances.
"To have a massive program that is concealed from leaders in Congress, it is not only inappropriate; it could be illegal," Durbin said.
Responding to Durbin, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the Republican whip, said lawmakers must not "jump to any conclusions" and remember that Cheney had a responsibility to protect the national security.
Appearing on CNN, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said it was not appropriate to fail to notify top congressional leaders about an intelligence program. But he accused Democrats of undermining the CIA through constant criticism of the agency.
"We have to have an extraordinarily robust and strong CIA, an extraordinarily and robust intelligence-gathering organization," Gregg said. "And this national attempt by some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to basically undermine the capacity to protect and develop intelligence is, I think, going to harm us in the long run."
Republicans also argued that a decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogators also risked undermining American security by unnecessarily weakening the intelligence community.
"This is high-risk stuff," Sen. John Cornyn (R- Texas) told Fox News. "Because if we chill the willingness of our intelligence operatives to get information that is necessary to protect America, there could be disastrous consequences."
While Democrats expressed support for Holder, some lawmakers continued to push their own alternative plans to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by the Bush administration.
But Democrats were united in condemning Cheney for allegedly ordering the CIA not to reveal details of a still-secret intelligence program.
CIA Director Leon E. Panetta ordered the program halted shortly after learning about it, then immediately called special sessions with lawmakers to discuss the terminated initiative.
Sources have refused to provide any details about what the program involved or what it was meant to achieve. It was put in place in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, but never became fully operational.
Appearing on Fox News Sunday, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Panetta had told congressional leaders that Cheney had ordered the agency to withhold details of the program from Capitol Hill.
Feinstein said it was a "big problem" that the congressional intelligence committees were not briefed on the program.
"I think if the intelligence committees had been briefed, they could have watched the program, they could have asked for reports on the program, they could have made judgments about the program as it went along," Feinstein said. "That was not the case because we were kept in the dark. That is something that should never happen again."
Although the law requires that congressional committees be "kept fully and currently informed" on intelligence activities, there is some latitude for both highly sensitive programs and routine ones.
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), the Senate's majority whip, told ABC's "This Week" that Congress should investigate whether Cheney or others ordered that the program not be disclosed to lawmakers.
The existence of secret programs can be protected by congressional leaders, Durbin said. Not disclosing the program, he added, violated the constitutional system of checks and balances.
"To have a massive program that is concealed from leaders in Congress, it is not only inappropriate; it could be illegal," Durbin said.
Responding to Durbin, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the Republican whip, said lawmakers must not "jump to any conclusions" and remember that Cheney had a responsibility to protect the national security.
Appearing on CNN, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) said it was not appropriate to fail to notify top congressional leaders about an intelligence program. But he accused Democrats of undermining the CIA through constant criticism of the agency.
"We have to have an extraordinarily robust and strong CIA, an extraordinarily and robust intelligence-gathering organization," Gregg said. "And this national attempt by some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle to basically undermine the capacity to protect and develop intelligence is, I think, going to harm us in the long run."
Republicans also argued that a decision to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogators also risked undermining American security by unnecessarily weakening the intelligence community.
"This is high-risk stuff," Sen. John Cornyn (R- Texas) told Fox News. "Because if we chill the willingness of our intelligence operatives to get information that is necessary to protect America, there could be disastrous consequences."
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the former Republican presidential nominee who has been very critical of the Bush administration's interrogation practices, also said a special prosecutor should not be appointed.
"We all know bad things were done. We know the operatives were under orders to do so," McCain said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "For us to continue this and harm our image throughout the world, I agree with the president of the United States. It is time to move forward and not go back."
Among Democrats speaking today, Durbin voiced the most unequivocal support for appointing a special prosecutor.
"We all know bad things were done. We know the operatives were under orders to do so," McCain said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "For us to continue this and harm our image throughout the world, I agree with the president of the United States. It is time to move forward and not go back."
Among Democrats speaking today, Durbin voiced the most unequivocal support for appointing a special prosecutor.
"We don't want the attorney general to be afraid to ask questions when it comes to violations of the law," he said. "Those who followed the law, followed their directions, did it appropriately whether at intelligence agency [or] military agencies certainly shouldn't be prosecuted. But those who went beyond it, those who broke the law, need to be held accountable. No one is above the law."
But other Democrats continued to advocate different kinds of investigations. Feinstein spoke in favor of the intelligence committee's review of the interrogation of the so-called high-value detainees once held by the CIA.
Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the judiciary committee, said a special prosecutor could make it difficult to establish an independent committee to investigate allegations of wrongdoing during the Bush administration.
An independent commission would work only if some witnesses were given immunity, which could hamper a special prosecutor's investigation, Leahy said. He added that he would not interfere with Holder if he was to appoint a prosecutor, but he remained worried that such an investigation would target only low-level interrogators and ignore senior policymakers.
"I just do not want to see an instance where the higher-ups gave the order to break the law [but] the ones who get punished are the people on the front line, the lower-level troops," Leahy said.
Some human rights groups praised Holder for considering appointing a prosecutor. Jameel Jaffer, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's National Security Project, said publicly available evidence showed that the Bush administration violated domestic and international law by authorizing torture.
"It is time to finally confront the gross human rights abuses of the last administration," Jaffer said in a statement. "Initiating a criminal investigation is a crucial step towards restoring the moral authority of the United States abroad and restoring the rule of law at home."
julian.barnes@latimes.com
But other Democrats continued to advocate different kinds of investigations. Feinstein spoke in favor of the intelligence committee's review of the interrogation of the so-called high-value detainees once held by the CIA.
Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the judiciary committee, said a special prosecutor could make it difficult to establish an independent committee to investigate allegations of wrongdoing during the Bush administration.
An independent commission would work only if some witnesses were given immunity, which could hamper a special prosecutor's investigation, Leahy said. He added that he would not interfere with Holder if he was to appoint a prosecutor, but he remained worried that such an investigation would target only low-level interrogators and ignore senior policymakers.
"I just do not want to see an instance where the higher-ups gave the order to break the law [but] the ones who get punished are the people on the front line, the lower-level troops," Leahy said.
Some human rights groups praised Holder for considering appointing a prosecutor. Jameel Jaffer, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's National Security Project, said publicly available evidence showed that the Bush administration violated domestic and international law by authorizing torture.
"It is time to finally confront the gross human rights abuses of the last administration," Jaffer said in a statement. "Initiating a criminal investigation is a crucial step towards restoring the moral authority of the United States abroad and restoring the rule of law at home."
julian.barnes@latimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment