General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIf Feinstein votes to confirm Haspel
will that hurt her politically in Liberal California,
I know it will make it difficult for me to support her
nocalflea
(1,387 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)because supporting a torturer
I have to draw the line somewhere
nocalflea
(1,387 posts)There has already been attempts to smear Ms. Haspel.
' "It is important to note that she has spent nearly her entire CIA career undercover, Boyd said. Much of what is in the public domain about her is inaccurate. We are pleased that ProPublica is willing to acknowledge its mistakes and correct the record regarding its claims about Ms. Haspel. '
https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture
There are questions about the reported actions of Ms. Haspel. Ms. Haspel will certainly face these in her confirmation hearings.
Because of the classified nature of intelligence work, full disclosure is often not possible.
John Brennan is against torture, yet he supports Ms. Haspel as director. (Yes, the tapes ...).
I am not privy to the classified information that Senator Feinstein has. Either you trust her judgement or don't.
Anyone Trump appoints will be met with wariness. But, Haspel is a career professional unlike Pompeo or heaven-forbid Cotton.
We are not living in the best of all possible worlds. Neither is Senator Feinstien. Her choices are limited.
More_Cowbell
(2,190 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)It was long unclear whether Haspel oversaw just the waterboarding of Nashiri or also the 83 waterboards that Abu Zubaydah endured, long beyond the time he had agreed to talk, though new reports from ProPublica and The New York Times say the latter man was tortured before her time at the helm.
Whats not in dispute is Haspels role in the cover-up: Once Abu Zubaydah and Nashiri were shipped to their next stop in a series of black sites, Haspel started her multiyear campaign to destroy the videos that showed their torture, which indisputably contradicted written authorizations and records. Defying the warnings of multiple Democrats, the director of national intelligence and several judges, Haspel in November 2005, as chief of staff for the director of clandestine services, sent a cable ordering officers to stick the tapes into an industrial-strength shredder.
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...why she oversaw the destruction of torture evidence shortly after she was seated as chief.
bigtree
(85,917 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)"And now not even Feinstein herself is categorically opposed to Haspels nomination. Its no secret Ive had concerns in the past with her connection to the CIA torture program and have spent time with her discussing this, Feinstein said in a Tuesday statement. But she seems inclined to drop her past concerns about a torturers continued promotions in favor of competence leading the agency. To the best of my knowledge she has been a good deputy director and I look forward to the opportunity to speak with her again.
bigtree
(85,917 posts)Statement on Intel Committees CIA Detention, Interrogation Report
Mar 11 2014
WashingtonSenate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today spoke on the Senate floor regarding the committees study on the CIA Detention and Interrogation Program:
http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=db84e844-01bb-4eb6-b318-31486374a895
gabeana
(3,166 posts)that is 2014
if she supports Haspel today that is what I care about not 2014
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...I'm not wasting my time trying to stop you from flailing about with this contradictory HuffPo opinion piece like its some gospel on Feinstein.
Educate yourself..
gabeana
(3,166 posts)go away not going to waste my time on a sycaphant
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...and I'll tell you about mine:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10025320097
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10025928844
Educate yourself.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)stop being insecure
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...playing politics, poorly.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)no problem with torture if the person you support can overlook it
quit projecting, you are not coming off as smart as you think you are
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Hekate
(90,189 posts)Shit-stirring then.
Aimed once again at a powerful Democratic woman. What a shock.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)can't question if the supports of a person who covered up torture at the least
Hekate
(90,189 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)And now not even Feinstein herself is categorically opposed to Haspels nomination. Its no secret Ive had concerns in the past with her connection to the CIA torture program and have spent time with her discussing this, Feinstein said in a Tuesday statement. But she seems inclined to drop her past concerns about a torturers continued promotions in favor of competence leading the agency. To the best of my knowledge she has been a good deputy director and I look forward to the opportunity to speak with her again.
I hope she votes against her but if she doesn't then I'd have to consider voting against her in the primary
maybe it is not a deal breaker for you, but for me and I am sure there are more like me who would have a hard time voting for her
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...by a contradictory HuffPo opinion piece by Marcy Wheeler.
Notes Feinstein's opposition, even in the face of a Democratic administration, then blames her for the Obama admin. failure to prosecute.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)to confirm then
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)or will you just move on to another pre-emotive speculative attack on another Dem?
not at all
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)I appreciate your honesty.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)pretty low bar for you as it pertain to smearing
by asking 'if" support because as of now she is not a solid no vote is she?
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)If you had wings youd be an airplane.
Thats the value of if speculative questions.
Attacking someone for something they have not done is a smear.
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Your first line makes it sound like you don't live in California because you don't know what our reaction would be
Your second line makes it sound like maybe you do live here because of talk of "supporting her" i.e. voting?
gabeana
(3,166 posts)and on the fence to vote for her in the primary
Hekate
(90,189 posts)Especially since I am sure you must have followed the link provided by another poster?
gabeana
(3,166 posts)And now not even Feinstein herself is categorically opposed to Haspels nomination. Its no secret Ive had concerns in the past with her connection to the CIA torture program and have spent time with her discussing this, Feinstein said in a Tuesday statement. But she seems inclined to drop her past concerns about a torturers continued promotions in favor of competence leading the agency. To the best of my knowledge she has been a good deputy director and I look forward to the opportunity to speak with her again
cbreezen
(694 posts)Please tell me which Californian you would like to see replace her.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)cbreezen
(694 posts)I live in Oregon but pay taxes in California.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)cbreezen
(694 posts)Why Kevin?
gabeana
(3,166 posts)besides I said maybe, as of now I'm leaning towards Feinstein but if she votes to confirm then I'd have to reconsider my decisions
still_one
(91,950 posts)Based on their views and voting records they are both considered progressives
Paka
(2,760 posts)but I'm voting for Allison Hartson.
cbreezen
(694 posts)Tell me about Allison Hartson.
MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)I really couldnt vote for someone like that when every seat matters more than ever before.
Paka
(2,760 posts)I thought challenging the status quo when it wasn't working was a good thing to do. My bad!
MrsCoffee
(5,801 posts)Or maybe we just have a different idea of what isnt working.
Ms. Toad
(33,915 posts)Hekate
(90,189 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)you know right?
Ms. Toad
(33,915 posts)gabeana
(3,166 posts)pretty big also
still_one
(91,950 posts)before they vote on the confirmation.
The OP now makes a veiled speculation that Feinstein could possibly vote for confirmation, without explaining a basis for that speculation
My suggestion is if the OP is concerned about Haspel's confirmation is for the OP to write or call Senator Feinstein's office and express those concerns, since this confirmation vote will be occurring before the June 5th primary, and November general election
emulatorloo
(43,979 posts)mcar
(42,210 posts)We got our Pelosi bashing threads, our Hillary bashing threads and now this!
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)on this subject, and neither of us do, I suggest not embracing ignorance over knowledge, and certainly not in hopes of virtue. A huge part of being profoundly ignorant, not educating ourselves, and of dismissing the decisions of those who are not, is that we can't know if what we're doing is right or not.
Btw, I will support Feinstein's decision because she's a liberal Democrat and because of her history and the histories of other Democratic Party liberals, which though imperfect are enormously better than the right's. I would not support the decision of any Republican in congress today given their history of embracing evil solutions over principled, good sense ones.
Bottom line, in a very imperfect world of hard choices, we were and are still the guys in the white hats.
Democrats on senate intelligence committee
Mark Warner, Virginia, Vice Chairman
Dianne Feinstein, California
Ron Wyden, Oregon
Martin Heinrich, New Mexico
Angus King, Maine[12]
Joe Manchin, West Virginia
Kamala Harris, California
Republicans on senate intelligence committee
Richard Burr, North Carolina, Chairman
Jim Risch, Idaho
Marco Rubio, Florida
Susan Collins, Maine
Roy Blunt, Missouri
James Lankford, Oklahoma
Tom Cotton, Arkansas
John Cornyn, Texas
gabeana
(3,166 posts)that covered up torture more power to you
if it doesn't bother you
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)likely to be put up would bother me more. We're a minority party thanks to people I spit on for handing our nation over to the party that institutionalized torture in OUR nation. That means we have limited ability to affect these things and have to be careful what we expend it on.
One thing you should know is that Feinstein has this woman's record memorized. She undoubtedly has been in it a number of times over the years, while I'm guessing you haven't studied the little reported in in the MSM or have any idea how reliable that is.
You might at least wonder who the Republicans' second choice would be if we killed this one and what's in THAT person's resume. Because you would OWN everything that person did differently if somehow you were able to kill this one.
There is no virtue in facile, ignorant meddling completely without concern for the consequences.
And there is great evil in ignorantly empowering those who believe in kidnapping people and delivering them to evil hellholes for torture and murder, all without trial. Which undermining the efforts of our own people on the senate intelligence committee to check them as best they are able would be likely to do.
Autumn
(44,755 posts)I will have a problem with any Dem who votes to confirm her.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)here is a link to a Hill article this morning
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/378702-feinstein-faces-new-pressure-from-left-over-cia-nominee
Feinstein who is up for reelection in 2018 and facing a primary challenge from the left took heat this week when she said that she was undecided on Haspel and described her as good deputy director at the spy agency.
Autumn
(44,755 posts)that any person has with another has no bearing on mine. I know what I can and can not live with. Torture is a stain on our country and I will support no one who condones it or has condoned it.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)her?
gabeana
(3,166 posts)support a senator who voted to confirm especially from a liberal state
a bunch post on this thread seem to have no problem with it
jalan48
(13,797 posts)and when you respond all they come back is how much smarter they are in their opinions
In which i'd gather is rather subjective
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...without any evidence, at all?
The op has gone from speculating, from a contradictory opinion piece not even in the op, that Feinstein will vote for Haspel, to just claiming that the senator will vote for Haspel.
We don't yet know if Sen. Feinstein will vote in favor of Haspel. What we do have is her statement and letter demanding answers about Haspel's past association with tortures, and the senator's past record of LEADERSHIP against tortures spanning two successive administrations.
Heaven forbid Duers express confidence in this Democratic leader on this Democratic board.
jalan48
(13,797 posts)bigtree
(85,917 posts)...or where I said I support Haspel, for that matter.
You and the op are engaging in sophistry.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)will trash another Dem for having a question about a Dem politician will turn the other way to torture
I got it you are an apologist for someone like, that is how come off
bigtree
(85,917 posts)...this thread is little more than you dissembling to recover whatever point you wanted to make in the op. I saw where you recc'd it yourself.
You're embarrassing yourself. In your lifetime, you will never achieve a speck of what the senator has done for the nation to confront and end tortures by our military and government.
Link to tweet
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)I have no doubt, though, that the Trump crowd has decided to throw that out there in hopes of boxing Feinstein in AND freaking out the Democratic base in hopes that we'll start turning on each other.
I doubt they'll ever be able to box in DiFi, but, if this thread is any indication, the second prong is working.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)then that Feinstein is considering supporting Haspel?
EffieBlack
(14,249 posts)nini
(16,670 posts)this 'IF' crap makes it difficult for me to take you seriously.
gabeana
(3,166 posts)and destroyed evidence then no
and if you do it say's a lot about your values
IF IF IF
I never said what I would think if she voted yes. Your whole premise is flawed and my values are just fine thank you very much.