Why did Feinstein release the report now?
In my earlier post about the release of the Senate’s Intelligence Committee’s report on harsh interrogation practices under the Bush administration, I characterized the report as a partisan attempt to return to the good old days of Bush-bashing, when Democrats were riding high. But it’s a bit puzzling that it was Senator Dianne Feinstein—who is a partisan Democrat who sometimes actually seems to show regard for the security of the US and to be a hawk on terrorists (at least, a hawk compared to most other Democrats)—who ordered that release over the request of the current administration’s John Kerry.
So, why now? Feinstein’s answer is here, and the gist of it is that it was the Democrat’s last chance:
Timing, for Feinstein was a big factor. “I realize the Senate changes leadership in January, and so the likelihood of the report coming out next year was slim and none, so we had a limited opportunity after five and a half years of work to get this out,” she said. She conceded that the safety situation abroad was “difficult,” but, she continued, “It’s going to remain difficult.”…
There are many critics of Feinstein who point out that what is covered in the torture report is in the past, that President Obama ended the practices portrayed within it early in his administration. Feinstein’s great hope in publicizing the report now, at the last possible moment that she can, is that the harsh light it shines on the CIA’s practices in the early years after the 9/11 attacks will help ensure that those practices remain in the past. Cordes asked her whether it was fair to revisit what was done, given that the techniques used are different now.
“Read the report,” Feinstein said, “and you tell me if you think this is how you want the country to behave.”
Which is not an answer to the question, is it? At least, not a direct one.
It’s pretty clear what happened here. After the Republicans refused to work on a Democrat-controlled report that Republicans perceived from the start would be a predetermined hit job on the previous administration and the CIA (for example, the Democrats declined to follow the usual standards and did not interview the parties involved—sort of like Rolling Stone, if you think about it), the Democrats worked long and hard to write this. Realizing that in just one month they would no longer control the Senate committees they’ve been in charge of since 2007, it was now or never to dump the report on the public and the world.
Feinstein has a more personal reason to want revenge on the CIA:
A turning point for Ms. Feinstein [in her decision about whether to release the report] came in March with the disclosure that C.I.A. workers had infiltrated the computers used by Senate Intelligence Committee staff members to write the report. The C.I.A. also had made a criminal referral to the Justice Department of some of the committee staff members, accusing them of improperly gaining access to secret agency material.
Incensed at what she saw as a breach of the separation of powers and an effort to intimidate her staff, Ms. Feinstein went public on the Senate floor and exposed the rift between the agency and the Senate. John O. Brennan, the director of the C.I.A., was forced to apologize to the Senate for his agency’s conduct, and no inquiry was pursued against the staff members.
The fact that these practices are in the past considerably weakens Feinstein’s case for release of the report. Note also that this secret CIA monitoring of committee members (which was clearly wrong) was done under the aegis of the Obama administration, not Bush, and it was directed towards Democrats, not Republicans. Feinstein only seems concerned about violations of the separation of powers when it directly involves a violation of her powers, not the other myriad ways in which Obama has crossed that line.
ADDENDUM: Here’s Feinstein being asked a tough question by Wolf Blitzer:
But it’s a bit puzzling that it was Senator Dianne Feinstein–who is a partisan Democrat who sometimes actually seems to show regard for the security of the US and to be a hawk on terrorists (at least, a hawk compared to most other Democrats)
100% of that has to do with the profit her husband makes. Check that connection and who his employers are.
Democrats don’t understand that most Americans favor cops over crooks and the CIA over terrorists. If members of AQ got roughed up, it was small stuff compared to bombing civilians and beheading Americans. It’s good to know that some Americans actually love their country to the extent that they take risks.
I’m really saddened by Feinstein’s behavior here. She’s been the one hawkish Democrat in a position of leadership and power for several years now. It looks as if hubris did its thing with her, but, dang, I’d hoped she was above that. She is 81 years old — perhaps she’s just losing it?
I haven’t read the report, but it’s clear that far worse happened to those rendered–renditioned–rended, something, to less scrupulous countries.
Did we see anything about Clinton’s rendition program?
“Read the report,” Feinstein said, “and you tell me if you think this is how you want the country to behave.”
When faced with a mortal threat, a nation that insists upon bringing only a knife to a gun fight is doomed to defeat. Only in the movies and fiction novels do the good guys prevail, when refusing to fight fire with fire.
“War is cruelty. There is no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over. We cannot change the hearts and minds of those people of the
SouthMiddle East, but we can make war so terrible . . . [and] make them so sick of war that generations would pass away before they would again appeal to it.” Gen. William Tecumsah ShermanShe released the report because that’s what democrats do. They are vindictive and are trying to get back at the evil Bush. Remember that in 1975 the democrats cut funding to our allies in SE Asia so they would fall to the communists. They did it to get back at Nixon. The democrats hated Nixon.
Stephen Hayes posted this rebuttal by a former interrogator experienced in enhanced interrogation techniques on the Weekly Standard website. It’s well worth a longish read.
It seems the Dems want to restrict our interrogation technique to sitting down with a member of ISIS over a cup of coffee and trying to empathize (thank you Hillary) with his point of view. They are really putting the country in danger by tying our hands to such an extent and are borderline treasonous IMHO.
…not to mention it cost $40 million dollars to prepare this report! That’s sick.
I only wish she would get hopped up and do something about President Obama’s complete usurpation of legislative powers regarding immigration.
“Incensed at what [Feinstein] saw as a breach of the separation of powers . . . .”
So the tapping of Senate computers by the CIA is an unforgivable breach of the separation of powers, but Obama’s unauthorized changes to legislation are not? It always depends on just whose ox is being gored doesn’t it?
I remember watching the Democrats closely in the years following 9/11 (because we lived just outside of DC) and it became clear to me that when it comes down to it, Democrats favor politics over national security. They just do. I can’t even begin to understand how they rationalize it, and it this point, I don’t care to. She’s not only inflaming terrorists, she’s also giving America’s enemies at the UN a great tool with which to attack us diplomatically.
Of course the Dems and the MSM will report this with little context, such as the fact that these same Democrats were demanding the CIA do whatever was necessary right after 9/11. In addition, we were fighting an enemy that wouldn’t (and still doesn’t) hesitate to do so much more – one can see for themselves in an AQ manual on torture, complete with helpful illustrations (http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/05/24/al-qaeda-torture-handbook/). Things are even worse today given the rise of the even more bloodthirsty ISIS.
I’d would have loved it if Blitzer (are anyone in the media) had asked Feinstein this: Considering Obama’s years of drone assassinations with no oversight,/em>, in which he has killed not only terrorist targets, but bystanders, first responders, an American citizen (and terrorist, but still) *and his son* – would Feinstein say this is A]not as bad, B]the same, or C]worse than the torture she’s so generously detailed for our enemies? I think her answer would clear any confusion over her true level of concern with the poor treatment of potential terrorists.
“So the tapping of Senate computers by the CIA is an unforgivable breach of the separation of powers, but Obama’s unauthorized changes to legislation are not? It always depends on just whose ox is being gored doesn’t it?”
iirc, it was actually the “tapping” of CIA computers. My recollection of the details is that the CIA and Senate staffers were sharing computers, and the CIA either learned or suspected that the Senate staffers were using the computers to access CIA content that was supposed to be off limits to them. So the CIA went snooping and found it was true.
I think they released it yesterday simply to trump the Gruber testimony, and it worked. The coverage on radio stations other than Fox was dedicated to the CIA report, with nary a word about Gruber’s testimony.
An editorial on Germany’s ARD tonight, of course, blamed Bush and Runsfeld. They are outraged at what Americans have done. It didn’t bother them when Saddam was doing far worse things and bribing UN to get the US out of his hair. I hope this will be ignored in a day or so, but I doubt it because the Greens will keep it in the media to prove their moral superiority. If you hear an explosion, it could be my head.
Junior,
This is the first time I’ve read what you have written, but I must admit I haven’t followed this particular controversy that closely.
Then even the the “original sin” was not the CIS’s but that of Senate staffers.
Beyond despicable. Absolutely unforgivable. Loathsome.
Let’s see, Dianne…Every bit as many Republican senators voted for the dastardly release of this lives-endangering crap and potful of lies as voted for Obamacare. Rush read a pithy little quote of yours from 2002, you insufferable b’yotch, which co-signed the use of enhanced methods to get at the Truth of al Qaeda. Google my late, great heroic friend Ricky Rescorla, Miss Filth-for-Brains, and know that he’d not urinate on you were you on fire.
How many CIA key players were deposed and closely questioned by your Intelligence Committee, Honey Bunny?? Answer: ZERO.
Mind Boggling.
Why did Feinstein release the report now? The answer was obvious from the beginning but it is even better when she admits it herself. The Democrats including Feinstein know that their report was a partisan witch hunt which the Republicans wouldn’t have released the so they released it now while they could before the Republicans took power. In other words, the Democrats are doing everything in their power to destroy the American middle class who have rejected them.
Believing that your masters will take care of you and all that, because they are “above that” is kind of the problem, isn’t it.
Why did Feinstein release the report now?
It served many purposes. An attack on the GOP and Bush. An attack on the CIA’s intelligence gathering capabilities. (Ala the Church Report.) It drove the Gruber hearings off the news. It provides a campaign issue for Hillary or whoever is the dem nominee. Remember, “We must empathize with our enemies.” We would not want to destroy them now, would we?
I just read a synopsis of the Church report. How quaint that one was. They were concerned because the CIA was doing black ops and covert ops using thuggish contractors. Oh, and spying on citizens. The result of the Church report was that we never knew the USSR was about to collapse nor did we have a clue about anything going on in the Muslim world – African Embassy attacks, USS Cole, Khobar Towers, Blackhawk down, 1993 World Trade Center attack, 9/11 and much more. This report puts us back on course for more of the same. It’s what the progs do.
DiFi probably hates “24” and Jack Bauer too.
How could Jack save the U.S. if he had a Lib boss like that?
Jack Bauer the actor is hilarious. He’s like anti gun and anti terror.
Has anyone followed the angle that outgoing Senator Udall was poised to read the entire report into the Congressional Record supported by every manner of Leftist group who may have convinced him this would make him a historic figure?
Did Senator Feinstein do the country a favor and prevent something even more damaging? Anyone else following the Demand Progress.org et.al pressure on Udall to, in their warped view of the world “shame” the Bush Administration one last time?
Dick Cheney was steadfastly blunt and brilliant tonight on Brett Baer’s Special Report(FoxNews). Oh, and wonderfully unrepentant and unapologetic. And Dr.Krauthammer & Jonah Goldberg made terrific follow-ups on Brett’s roundtable.
I am with Tom in thinking its a distraction from grubergate, but it also was a matter of smearing those who do a dirty job to protect America, and an opportunity to taint the reputations of chimp Bush and darth Cheney.
CIA directors and deputy directors respond:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/cia-interrogations-saved-lives-1418142644
Add: Linked in the WSJ article, but worth a standalone cite:
http://ciasavedlives.com/
Add2: This is the activist game.
The fact that there were no recommendations for changing things, is another clue. This was a political witch hunt that has made us all less safe.
It is what the progs do. Traitors!
Eric, the cia saved lives site is good, but how many LIVs will ever see it or hear any of the points from their fave news shows on the MSM or NPR? Precious few! The Pravda like news media are like air power in war. They are the decisive force that keeps the narrative going.
Seeing the POS Senator Udall blathering on America’s evilness gave me a smile knowing that his state of Clorado has Kicked His Deserving Azz OUT. Buuuuu-Byeeeeeee, POS.
I guess Udall has *burned his bridges*
it would be *nice* if the hippocrite made a mental comparison to the *abortion agenda* that he so enthusiastically espoused, but that would require some incite a rare commodity in a politician !
Feinstein distracts from the the house GOP betrayal on the 2015 spending bill.
How’s that incremental strategy by the RINOS working out?
Remove Boehner! Impeach obola!!
We can only hope that the treachery and destructive behavior is rewarded in kind. One can only imagine what’s transpired in the last six years (and what’s to come) and hope that unprecedented disclosures, scorched earth investigation and inquiry will last for years to come. Feinstein’s indignation rings hollow, she and all the rest knew what was happening to the bastards. I was in NYC that day, that year, those years, Their deeds continue unabated. The inevitable solution is going to be far more severe than a water treatment.