Comments on: CIA Stalling on the IG Report

By: fatster

fatster — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:29:10 +0000

Greenwald has an article up about Froomkin, and he quotes Krugman liberally (no pun intended), too.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/index.html

By: Jkat

Jkat — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:53:17 +0000

…i’m wondering who else won’t be covering the report ~~when~~ if it finally emerges…..

there ya go ..all fixed

By: Rayne

Rayne — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:14:39 +0000

But now that the checks are finite, will Froomkin go off the hook? will the editors now clamp down more tightly?

And will the IG report see the light of day before Froomkin is off the WaPo’s deck?

I’m wondering who else won’t be covering the report when it finally emerges.

By: SparklestheIguana

SparklestheIguana — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 03:57:10 +0000

Froomkin said White House Watch would be running until late June / early July.

By: Jkat

Jkat — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:59:34 +0000

aha ..bmaz sez: “all your additions is bad .. ” ..

now i ask ya ..truly .. have you ever seen republican conservo-turd math “add up” .. it wouldn’t be so bad if we were watching this political saga being presented as an example of the theater-of-the-absurd .. but my gawd .. this is real life here …

it adds alright .. but it figures out to a total waste .. that’s teh bottom line: a total waste ..

By: bmaz

bmaz — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:50:00 +0000

…139. The CIA’s purpose in requesting advice from OLC was the very likely prospect of criminal, civil, or administrative litigation against the CIA and CIA personnel who participate in the Program. The CIA requested OLC’s legal advice both because the CIA and its personnel anticipated that these issues would continue to be the subject of litigation and, for some of these documents, because the CIA and its personnel had been subject to criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings concerning the Program.

But wait, that cannot be right, because the Bushies and spooks assured us sincerely that there was no possible litigation, civil or criminal, that could possibly involve the destroyed torture tapes as material evidence.

Something doesn’t add up here; how can that be???

By: Jkat

Jkat — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:35:32 +0000

thanks mad dog .. hmmm.. 83 page PDF eh ?? thank ya again .. you’ve apparently got a plethora of patience …

so .. what we see ..plainly .. is that the spooks “anticipated” a shitstorm ..and were fully cognizant that the OLC fig leaves wouldn’t cover their precious anatomical parts from dangerous exposure .. that’s what we can infer from that

the cia and it’s personnel anticipated ..litigation .blah..blah ..”Teh Program”.. blah..blah ..

right ?? i mean .. uhh.. predicting liability as “virtually inevitable” … is a dead tip off .. no ??

they knew full well what they were doing was illegal ..[and expected to be called to accounts] and the OLC knew it too.. everybody knew it .. [hell.. even us DFH’s knew it] and the whole memos shebang is/was nothing but very cheap bad kabuki .. [if it were saki …the hangover would kill ya..yeah it’s that bad] .. pure political rotgut .. with the corrupting force to eat the guts out of a body politic ..

y’all are a truly awesome resource … many kudos

By: Rayne

Rayne — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:23:15 +0000

What a pity WaPo let Froomkin go the day before the IG report was scheduled to be released…ahem.

By: lesserdevil

lesserdevil — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 01:20:43 +0000

This is not surprising. The huge drag continues.

By: MadDog

MadDog — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:41:53 +0000

And to assist our understanding on just why the CIA is stalling and trying to again redact much of CIA IG Helgerson’s Special Review report, it helps to re-visit what the CIA’s own Office of General Counsel (OGC) was doing when they were communicating with the DOJ’s OLC on October 22, 2004 regarding (page 27 - doc 67 of 83 page PDF):

…a draft legal opinion being prepared at the request of the CIA, and provides additional facts to DOJ for the purpose of obtaining legal advice…

From pages 63-64 of Declaration of Ralph Dimaio - CIA (80 page PDF):

…139. The CIA’s purpose in requesting advice from OLC was the very likely prospect of criminal, civil, or administrative litigation against the CIA and CIA personnel who participate in the Program. The CIA requested OLC’s legal advice both because the CIA and its personnel anticipated that these issues would continue to be the subject of litigation and, for some of these documents, because the CIA and its personnel had been subject to criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings concerning the Program.

This advice was not solicited in the ordinary course of business. Rather, the requests for advice were solicited in order to prepare the CIA to defend against future criminal, civil, and administrative proceedings that the CIA considered to be virtually inevitable…