Lawyers Cleared Destroying CIA Tapes

[DeepModem Mom]

Source: New York Times

By MARK MAZZETTI and SCOTT SHANE
Published: December 11, 2007

WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 — Lawyers within the clandestine branch of the Central Intelligence Agency gave written approval in advance to the destruction in 2005 of hundreds of hours of videotapes documenting interrogations of two lieutenants from Al Qaeda, according to a former senior intelligence official with direct knowledge of the episode.

The involvement of agency lawyers in the decision making would widen the scope of the inquiries into the matter that have now begun in Congress and within the Justice Department. Any written documents are certain to be a focus of government investigators as they try to reconstruct the events leading up to the tapes’ destruction.

The former intelligence official acknowledged that there had been nearly two years of debate among government agencies about what to do with the tapes, and that lawyers within the White House and the Justice Department had in 2003 advised against a plan to destroy them. But the official said that C.I.A. officials had continued to press the White House for a firm decision, and that the C.I.A. was never given a direct order not to destroy the tapes.

“They never told us, ‘Hell, no,’” he said. “If somebody had said, ‘You cannot destroy them,’ we would not have destroyed them.”

The former official spoke on condition of anonymity because there is a continuing Justice Department inquiry into the matter. He said he was sympathetic to Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., the former chief of the clandestine branch, who has been described by intelligence officials as having authorized the destruction of the tapes. The former official said he was concerned that Mr. Rodriguez was being unfairly singled out for blame in the destruction of the tapes.

The former official said Mr. Rodriguez decided in November 2005 that he had sufficient authority to destroy the interrogation videos, based on the written authorization given to him from lawyers within the branch, then known as the Directorate of Operations....

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/washington/11intel.html?hp

[dysfunctional press]

1. ah...well...that's o.k. then...

:eyes:

[magellan]

2. If 'plausible deniability' were a source of energy

...this country would be rich beyond its wildest imaginings.

[KittyWampus]

3. who ordered the destruction?

[L. Coyote]

4. INVOLVED: "lawyers within the White House and the Justice Department"

Would that therefore bring Ashcroft and Gonzales into the list of co-conspirators covering up war crimes?

[EFerrari]

9. Lawyers within the White House represent the President.

You were right.

[L. Coyote]

11. Is this why the new lawyers for the WH include So NY USA attorneys?

Where Mukasey handled the rulings and the Padilla case, now in jeopardy, NOT??

Looks like Biden has it right. We need an independent counsel like never before.

[fdonagaugh]

5. You can bet the White House Lawyers are working overtime

on this one. But, no matter how long they work on it, the fact is, Rodriquez had no right to unilaterally authorize the destruction of these tapes - for so many reasons, even Boston Legal wouldn't touch this one with a ten-foot pole.

[Rageneau]

6. Anybody know if Almighty God has weighed in on this torture issue?

It would be great cover for BushCo if they could get God on record as aying torture is just fine with Him.

[L. Coyote]

13. Ask Bush. He talks to the woman.

[grasswire]

7. not only that...

...but Olbermann revealed that no order was given for preservation of further documents/information regarding this matter until mid-weekend. Giving them the opportunity to shred and erase, yet again.

[LiberalFighter]

8. Lawyers involved in cover-up need to be disbarred for life.

[L. Coyote]

10. "it is highly likely that George Tenet showed part of the videotape of the interrogation to the Pres

So, who wasn't involved in covering up war crimes?

[shraby]

12. If it was hundreds of hours, it was more than two

tapes. What in the hell took them hundreds of hours to question 2 people? That's a lot of time.

[go west young man]

17. It probably took hundreds of hours because the interrogators

probably never heard the true story of 9/11 before.

[rockybelt]

14. OK

Where is the written authorization and who was it signed by?
This is all bull shit

[madrchsod]

15. so the lawyers broke the law also

where fitzgerald? he`d love to take these people apart....

[catnhatnh]

16. Are you guys obtuse?

Lawyers UNDER Rodriguez are the "Few Bad Apples" that caused this.Just like the "Few Bad Apple NCO's" CAUSED the entire Abu Gharib thing....See-rotten apples only rot UPWARDS towards innocent General officers and CIA Heads.Thank God they NEVER rot downward or the basis for all these warcrimes could be undermined....when private soldiers given no targets they are forced to abuse themselves, since they control neither the Constitution nor prisoners.These Lowly "grunt" lawyers,denied the access Rodriguez had to the Contitution itself were relegated to turning their anger on a few obscure clauses in the Bll of Rights...

[RufusTFirefly]

19. Yup. Just a few bad apples.

Phew! The system works.

:sarcasm:

[Lint Head]

18. This doesn't mean that Cheney didn't order the tapes

destroyed before getting his ducks in a row. It looks like just in case questions were asked they had written approval ready. The question is, who ordered the tapes be destroyed and who gave Rodriguez the 'authority' to destroy the tapes. These are vital questions. :dem:

[Vinca]

20. You know Cheney's got to be involved here. nt

[Javaman]

21. Well, if the lawyers say it's okay then it must be okay! just like

abu gonzales giving moron* a free pass to torture.

[Supersedeas]

22. keystone cops....looks like the alibi have been vetted though

[Supersedeas]

23. a law license in jeopardy -- and a seat at the CATO or AIE waiting...Libby style justice