Gina Haspell on Would She Order Torture Again
Closing summary
Gina Haspel, Donald Trump's nominee to lead the CIA, defended her record and pledged that under her leadership the agency would "never, ever" restart the brutal interrogation program like the one she helped run in 2002. Only later a nigh 3-hour confirmation hearing on Wednesday morning, the fate of her confirmation remains uncertain.
Several prominent senators have already indicated that they are likely to object over her role in the CIA's use of torture and it's unclear if her testimony was enough to overcome their objections.
During the hearing, Democrats on the commission sought to extract commitments from Haspel, who, if confirmed, would be the first adult female to run the agency, while Republicans widely praised her years of service.
This afternoon she volition testify once again before the commission in a airtight-door hearing, where senators can ask her questions related to classified intelligence.
- Haspel vowed that under her leadership the CIA would not restart an interrogation program that employed torture techniques. "I would not permit CIA to undertake activity that I idea was immoral, even if it was technically legal. I would admittedly not permit it."
- In exchanges with senators, Haspel was both defensive and evasive when pressed to expound on her views on the morality of the CIA's use of torture. She repeatedly refused to characterize the program in hindsight as "immoral". "My moral compass is strong," she said.
- Asked if she agreed with Donald Trump's cess that torture is an effective means of obtaining information, Haspel said: "I don't believe that torture works." But she added that valuable data was gained from the al-Qaida detainees who were subjected to the interrogation techniques.
- Haspel refused to say that she would inform the committee if Trump asked her for a pledge of loyalty, insisting the scenario was unlikely.
- She said she agreed with the conclusion that Russia interfered with the US presidential election to help elect Trump.
- Haspel disputed the assessment that she is the unidentified person referenced as the head of the bureau's interrogation programme in a book by longtime CIA lawyer John Rizzo. "I did not run the interrogation department," she said.
- Democrats accused Haspel of refusing to declassify sensitive information about her career that might be damaging to her nomination buts he dismissed their calls for more transparency.
Read David Smith's full written report:
Burr adjourns the hearing by telling Haspel that she "may in fact be the most qualified nominee always nominated for this role" and says she's poised to "fissure" the glass ceiling at the agency.
Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican who sits on the committee, announced before the hearing'southward decision that he will support Haspel.
"Gina Haspel is a career intelligence officeholder who has served over 30 years with the CIA, and combated both communist threats and terrorist organizations like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. She is perhaps the nearly highly qualified person e'er nominated for this crucial national security position. Her nomination has the support of vi sometime CIA Directors who accept served under presidents of both parties, and I look frontwards to her rapid confirmation on the Senate floor," Rubio said in a argument.
"I implore my colleagues not to play politics with this essential nomination, and to consider what message that would send to the thousands of patriotic personnel serving our nation at agencies in Washington and around the globe, besides as what bulletin that would send to our adversaries and those who seek us damage."
Burr and Warner are making their endmost remarks. There volition be a closed hearing later this public one ends, where senators can ask questions related to classified information.
A brief heated commutation erupted betwixt Warner and Cotton, who criticized his colleagues remarks. Cotton interrupted Warner as he delivered his last comments and Burr striking the gavel to silenece him.
Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat of Rhode Island, asks what she would say to the president if he asked for a personal pledge of loyalty.
"My merely loyalty is to the American people and the constitution of the United States. I am accolade-bound," she says.
Reed asked if she was approached by Trump in such a way, if she would inform Congress. Haspel does not agree to do so.
"I don't believe that such a circumstance would always occur," she says, even though former FBI manager James Comey - who was abruptly fired exactly one year ago - testified before Congress that Trump had sought to extract a pledge of loyalty from him.
Senator Kamala Harris, a Democrat from California and a quondam prosecutor, asks Haspel whether she believes torture techniques are immoral.
Haspel sidesteps the question each fourth dimension. Harris asks for a yes or no and she will not requite it.
Harris: "Exercise y'all believe in hindsight that those techniques were immoral?"
Haspel: "I think I've answered the question."
Harris: "No you have non."
Haspel repeatedly declines to respond "yes" or "no" as to whether previous interrogation techniques were "immoral" https://t.co/2MMmZpk0Jd
— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 9, 2018
Does torture work, Harris asks.
"I don't believe that torture works," she says but doesn't directly but and then says the program led to the extraction of "valuable information" and its unknowable whether "enhanced interrogation techniques played a role in that".
Senator Tom Cotton, a staunchly bourgeois Republican from Arkansas and an Iraq state of war veteran, used his time to critique his colleagues comments and views. He asks how many Democrats would support Haspel if she was nominated by Barack Obama. He jokes that she does not have to answer.
Cotton, who boasts a close relationship with Trump, was reportedly considered as a possible replacement for Mike Pompeo, the old CIA director who now serves as Secretary of State.
Tom Cotton preparing for his hereafter CIA directorship.
— Jason Leopold (@JasonLeopold) May ix, 2018
Next up is Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat whose vote may be pivotal to her confirmation. Haspel sat downwardly with Manchin this calendar week, and on Wed morning she hugged the Democrat upon entering the room earlier, which some observers interpreted as a positive sign.
His praise for her – Manchin said he boasts well-nigh the clandestine service to his West Virginia voters – propose that just may be the case.
Asked past Maine Contained Angus King whether she agrees with the Intelligence Community's 2017 assessment that Russia meddled in the Us presidential election to help Donald Trump win the Us presidency, Haspel says: "I do."
Hearing is interrupted by a protester who shouts: "No, the question is what do you practise to human beings in United states of america custody? How exercise you treat human beings in U.s.a. custody? Bloody Gina, bloody Gina, bloody Gina! You are a torturer." (She is escorted out by police force.)
— David Smith (@SmithInAmerica) May 9, 2018
In an exchange, Heinrich presses Haspel to say whether torturing terrorism suspects in postal service-9/11 flow was morally right. She does not answer directly simply defends her "moral compass".
"Nosotros should hold ourselves to a stricter moral standards, and I would never let CIA to be involved in coercive interrogations," she tells him.
"Where was that moral compass at the fourth dimension?" he replies.
"In all of my assignments I have conducted myself honorably and in accordance with Us police force. My parents raised me right. I know the departure between right and wrong," she replies.
Haspel besides says that in hindsight she would not support the lodge to destroy the tapes in 2005.
Haspel says she would no longer support the destruction of tapes that occurred in 2005; she told Heinrich privately she supported information technology at the time
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) May 9, 2018
Haspel on torture: 'Nosotros're not getting dorsum in that business'
Senator Susan Collins, a Republican from Maine, asks what she would do if Trump ordered her to waterboard a loftier value suspect
"Senator, I would advise - I practise not believe the president would inquire me to exercise that," she says, taking a long pause. "But we have today in the United states government other US government entities that behave interrogations. ... CIA is not the right identify to conduct interrogations."
"CIA does not today conduct investigations. We never did historically and we're not getting back in that business."
Senator Martin Heinrich, a Democrat from New United mexican states, follows up, saying she did not respond the question nigh what she would do if Trump ordered her to waterboard a detainee.
"I would not restart nether whatever circumstances an interrogation program at CIA, under any circumstances," she says.
Haspel gets defensive during a testy dorsum-and-along with Democratic senator Ron Wyden, a strident opponent of her nomination.
"Later on ix/xi, I didn't look to go to the Swiss desk. I stepped up. I was not on the sidelines," she said.
Feinstein asks whether Haspel is the person, referenced in a book by longtime senior CIA lawyer John Rizzo, who "has previously run the interrogation programme".
"Is that you lot?" Feinstein asked.
Haspel: "I'm so pleased you lot asked me that question."
Feinstein: "A yes or no will exercise."
Haspel: "No."
Haspel emphatically denies that she is that person in the book and says that a correction has been issued.
The book has been the source of much fence. Rizzo initially reaffirmed his contention in the book that Haspel "ran" the interrogation program but he afterwards walked that dorsum.
In an email to the Daily Beast's Spencer Ackerman terminal month, Rizzo said: "After reading your story, and upon further reflection, I want to make clear that I never intended to suggest in my book that Gina Haspell was in charge of CIA's interrogation program. She was not. I take nil further to say on this subject field other than to stress that I fully support her nomination to be CIA Director."
Haspel points to a story in the Washington Mail that explains the contention over the book. Read that here.
Haspel besides declines to respond a question from Feinstein almost whether she oversaw the waterboarding of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri at the black site prison house in Thailand. Haspel says the respond is classified.
Feinstein also asked: "Were you an abet for destroying the (CIA interrogation) tapes?"
Haspel replied: "Senator, I admittedly was an advocate if we could inside and befitting to United states of america police force."
Next up is Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, and one of the members of the committee who has pressed the CIA for more transparency from the CIA over her history.
Feinstein said the CIA declassified only select pieces of information while keeping damaging parts "under wraps".
Feintstein says she likes Haspel personally only finds the hearing to be "probably the almost difficult hearing in my more than two decades that I accept always sat in".
Senator James Risch, a Republican of Idaho, spends the majority of his five minutes for questions praising Haspel and recalling meeting her in the field. He does eventually enquire a question about the tension between the diverse agencies within the intelligence community and the congressional committees charged with overseeing them.
"I will sleep better at nighttime knowing you are directing these efforts," Sen. Risch tells Gina Haspel when pledging to support her nomination
— Chris Megerian (@ChrisMegerian) May 9, 2018
Why do senators charged with assessing and confirming senior officials use their question fourth dimension to shower nominees with unrestrained praise?
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) May 9, 2018
Haspel: I would never, e'er take CIA back to an interrogation programme
Warner: With the benefit of retrospect, do y'all believe the interrogation program was consequent with American values?"
Haspel doesn't reply directly and Warner follows upwardly, pressing her to reveal her "moral code."
She responds again: "I would never, ever accept CIA back to an interrogation program. Kickoff of all, CIA follows the law. Nosotros followed the constabulary then, nosotros follow the law today. I support the police. I wouldn't support a change in the law."
Warner comes back – what would yous do if the president asks you to do something y'all observe "morally objectionable"?
Haspel: "My moral compass is strong. I would non allow CIA to undertake activity that I thought was immoral even if information technology was technically legal. I would absolutely not permit it."
Warner: Then you lot wouldn't follow the president's social club?
Haspel: "No, I believe that CIA must undertake activities that are consistent with American values."
Burr begins the circular of questioning by asking Haspel to explicate her role in the destruction of videotapes that depicted brutal interrogations.
Haspel maintained that the determination to destroy the recordings was made by her dominate at the time, Jose Rodriguez, who was the director of the agency'south clandestine service.
"Mr Rodriguez has been very upwardly forepart on a number of occasions publicly that he and he alone made the decision to destroy the tapes. I would likewise arrive clear that I did not announced on the tapes as has been mischaracterized in the printing."
She said a review found that at that place was no legal requirement to go on the tapes. She said multiple investigations concluded that she was not at fault and her deportment and my decisions were consistent with my obligations equally an bureau officer.
reynoldsimall1949.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2018/may/09/gina-haspel-confirmation-hearing-donald-trump-live-updates
0 Response to "Gina Haspell on Would She Order Torture Again"
Post a Comment