« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Leahy, Specter to Mukasey: We're Gonna Be All Up in Your Grill about Torture-Tapes Investigation
You didn't think there'd be a scandal involving the destruction of potential evidence of torture without Pat Leahy and Arlen Specter getting involved, did you?
Leahy and Specter, the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote yesterday to Attorney General Michael Mukasey requesting a thorough understanding of the Justice Department's inquiry into the CIA's destruction of secret interrogation tapes. If Mukasey ever had a honeymoon at DoJ, it's already a distant memory.
The Dyspeptic Duo demand to know what the Justice Department knew about the tapes before their destruction -- after all, DoJ warned against junking them, so someone at DoJ knew they existed. And in a press release accompanying the letter, they threaten to turn next week's confirmation hearing for Mukasey's would-be deputy, Mark Filip, into "a public forum for Senators to query Filip about the Department of Justice’s reported investigation."
Full text of the letter follows the jump.
Here's the Leahy/Specter letter to Mukasey.
December 10, 2007The Honorable Michael B. Mukasey
Attorney General
United States Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20510Dear Attorney General Mukasey:
We write on behalf of the Senate Judiciary Committee to request important information about the reported destruction by the Central Intelligence Agency of videotapes showing interrogations of detainees and about the Department of Justice review of this matter. We were alarmed to learn of the existence of these videotapes only after they were destroyed, and to learn of the destruction of the tapes so long after the fact.
This weekend, the Department announced that the National Security Division will conduct a preliminary inquiry in conjunction with the CIA’s Office of Inspector General. Notwithstanding this inquiry, we request a complete account of the Justice Department’s own knowledge of and involvement with these matters. When and how did Department officials or attorneys first become aware of the existence of videotapes of detainee interrogations? Did Department officials or attorneys ever view the tapes? Did the Department evaluate the legality of the interrogation techniques used in the interrogations that were videotaped? When and how did Department officials or attorneys become aware of any plan to destroy videotapes of interrogations of detainees? Were Department officials or attorneys asked about the advisability or legality of destroying the tapes? Did Department officials or attorneys communicate views on the advisability or legality of destroying the tapes? When and how did Department officials or attorneys become aware that videotapes were destroyed? What communication has the Department had with the White House about the existence, plan to destroy, and destruction of the videotapes? With whom, how, and when were there any communications between the Department and the White House about these matters?
We would also like to know whether the Department or others in the Administration advised Members of Congress of the existence of these tapes or of their destruction. We learned yesterday through a Washington Post report that a small group of Congressional leaders was advised of the CIA’s secret detention and interrogation program as early as September 2002. Was this group or a similar group informed of the videotaping of interrogations or of the destruction of the videotapes? If so, when did this occur and what was the rationale for not advising the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees?
In addition, please describe the review that the National Security Division now intends to conduct. Who will conduct the review? How do they intend to proceed? What is the scope of the review? What specific facts and issues are involved? Senator Biden has suggested that a special counsel be appointed to conduct the investigation. How are you determining whether to proceed by way of a special counsel?
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
PATRICK LEAHY
ChairmanARLEN SPECTER
Ranking Member
Comments (32)
Dale wrote on December 11, 2007 10:11 AM:OMG...Yet *another* strongly worded letter. More "uncomfortable" questions at a confirmation hearing where "I don't recall" will be an acceptable answer. And then? And then...more verbal hand wringing before passing a nominee on.
Or perhaps, because this is just a deputy, the committee will actually choose to not approve the nominee, because after all, the only thing this "Democratically-controlled" Congress seems capapble of are "symbolic gestures."
That's not to say the nominee wouldn't be sent up to the full Senate where he would most likely be approved anyway, becuase, again, this is just a deputy, and not a policy maker or official with some authority.
Heck, perhaps Bush sent him up as a sacrificial lamb to let the Senate vent its spleen on an unimportant non-entity.
Sigh...
sally wrote on December 11, 2007 10:30 AM:All up in your grill... that was good. I also liked dyspeptic. Way to keep it interesting, I appreciate the creativity.
A. Citizen wrote on December 11, 2007 10:35 AM:Why do I find it hard to believe that this is the only time they recorded a waterboarding session? I mean, every Highway Patrol car has an on-board camera.
Legalize wrote on December 11, 2007 10:55 AM:Two words, Senators:
"Yeah" and "right."
moondancer wrote on December 11, 2007 11:11 AM:Oh I am on the edge of my seat waiting for the long line of perps that will be brought to Justice.....yawn.
Kathleen wrote on December 11, 2007 11:14 AM:Go Leahy. restore our faith in congress if you can.
I grew up in the Catholic church (I am a recovering Catholic) Leahy looks like the guy that we were told was god. So Leahy looks like god to me, well so does Helen Thomas. They sure act the way god should be if there is one.
Alguien wrote on December 11, 2007 11:29 AM:Could this be the beginning of "WATERBOARDGATE"...?
brendancalling wrote on December 11, 2007 11:38 AM:As much as I would like to believe so, I've given up all hope!
The Dyspeptic Duo has finally managed to teach us all that the best they can do is send more strong-worded letters and maybe a few subpoenas (which can be ignored with total impunity).
the specter spectacle is embarrassing. I do not understand why he makes this big show of "doing something about the problem" when specter is the REASON (or one for the reasons) for the problems to begin with.
After all, didn't Specter vote to confirm Gonzo the Torturer?
And didn't he vote FOR the Military Act of 2006, which repealed habeas and legalized torture?
And didn't he vote FOR Mukasey, even though Mukasey didn't answer his questions about torture?
When i spoke to his office, his flack acknowledged all this was true, but said "It's also true that Senator Specter fighting to restore habeas corpus." To which I responded, "look, say I have a big axe and chop off someone's hand on purpose. then I make these big efforts to sew the hand back on. Does that make me any less culpable for the initial injury?"
it's as bogus as Pelosi's claim that "eventually" she raised objections. What good are those objections when the crime is fait accompli??
I tell you, the only situation in which I wouldn't urinate on these criminals is if they were engulfed in flames.
donviti wrote on December 11, 2007 12:01 PM:yawn. These two clowns are like those two old muppets in the balcony.
Full of a bunch of one liners and you never see them do anything else.
nothing has come of ANYTHING these two morons have done...
12 months after this starts all the aholes in power will be gone and nothing will have happened to them.
Les wrote on December 11, 2007 12:28 PM:These discussions are rather silly.
Don't any of you understand that the country we knew as America is gone.
We had our chance, but we let it slip away.
lambert strether wrote on December 11, 2007 12:36 PM:For all intent and purposes the rule of law does not apply.
Those rules you use to be able to follow to inact change through elected representation now lay in shreds.
The only rule now is power.
There will be a ceremony January 1st 2008 at 1:00pm in front of the Lincoln memorial to symbolically and officially
lay america to rest.
It was fun while it lasted.
Hey, come on, people, let's be fair!
We have to give the Hill Democrats' extremely sophisticated strategy the time it needs to work!
After all, Conyers has sent NINE (9) Sternly Worded Letters, and he's just starting!
When Leahy/Spector get to 6 or 7... Then it will be time to worry.
Don't worry. Everything's going to be fine.
Wishfull thinking wrote on December 11, 2007 12:36 PM:December 10, 2007
The Honorable Michael B. Mukasey
Attorney General
United States Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Attorney General Mukasey:
We write on behalf of the Senate Judiciary Committee to request important information about the reported plans to cancel the upcoming 2008 presidential elections.
We also have some disturbing news of the "disappearance" of certain Democratic
candidates running for U.S senate in 2008.
Could you please get back to us at your convenience.
Sincerely,
PATRICK LEAHY
Chairman
ARLEN SPECTER
Ranking Member
Thank you for your (hoped for) prompt attention to this matter.
JohnW1141 wrote on December 11, 2007 12:49 PM:Specter and Leahy....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
turtleguy wrote on December 11, 2007 1:00 PM:Remember when Leahy used to get really ticked off and challenge the adminstration, even half yelling in the Senate? I wonder what their secret illegal surveillance of him found that has forced him to turn into another administration lackey? He just isn't the same man he was 3-4 years ago.
seriously, how many democratic congressman have been silenced through the illegal surveillance program? It wouldn't take many to make democrats completely ineffective.
chabuka wrote on December 11, 2007 1:07 PM:Oh WOW...the "dynamic duo"....as soon as the do or don't find out any thing..they will drop it..."gutless wonders" is more like it
OCPatriot wrote on December 11, 2007 1:19 PM:To Spencer Ackerman:
skdadl wrote on December 11, 2007 1:20 PM:Big deal. Tone down the rhetoric. We've been through this before. They write a letter. There's a delay. Maybe they get an equivocal answer back. Sounds disgustingly like what happened before. So stop sounding so excited. It only demeans what you're writing about.
Very truly yours
LAWRENCE LIGHT
I don't think the Deputy AG is "just a deputy." Think James Comey.
osage wrote on December 11, 2007 1:45 PM:ANOTHER Bush administration COVER-UP that Bush himself claims to have no knowledge of! IMPEACH - IMPEACH - IMPEACH Cheney and Bush for their unbridled incompetence, negligence and violations of the Constitution and rules of law. That these unscrupulous political whores keep telling lie after lied after lie to the American people to HIDE and COVER UP their unrelenting criminal actions is beyond rational believability. I don't care if Democrats have to go down too. We must restore the integrity of American government to prevent it from recurring by undergoing the IMPEACHMENT process and cleanse our nation's government of the contemptible corruption that exists within it today.
nofltwlt wrote on December 11, 2007 1:50 PM:Leahy yes; Specter, a shill for the administration, no.
Dennis wrote on December 11, 2007 1:59 PM:If/When important heads roll, including some in the White House, I'll believe these two are for real. In the meantime...
You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.
imdwalrus wrote on December 11, 2007 2:00 PM:Mukasey had better watch his step. If he doesn't play ball he could be looking at another strongly-worded letter somewhere down the line.
parrot wrote on December 11, 2007 2:13 PM:What will it take for the Congress to impeach someone? Toting a gun on the lawn of the Capitol? Apparently rigging elections, torturing people, lying to Congress, and obstructing justice, using foreign intelligence services to spy on Americans, that big long list just aren't enough for this bunch...
Anonymous wrote on December 11, 2007 2:36 PM:parrot wrote on December 11, 2007 2:13 PM:
"What will it take for the Congress to impeach someone? Toting a gun on the lawn of the Capitol? Apparently rigging elections, torturing people, lying to Congress, and obstructing justice, using foreign intelligence services to spy on Americans, that big long list just aren't enough for this bunch..."
WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO IMPEACH SOMEONE???
Very simple:
LYING ABOUT AN EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR!!!
Apparently, that's the only offense that can get you in trouble with Congress and it looks like Bush and Cheney feel pretty safe in that department! (probably due to shortage of volunteers!)
Zebracat wrote on December 11, 2007 2:45 PM:This sounds all too familiar. An evil republican president, a pointless war, and destroyed tapes? At least with Nixon the congress grew a spine and brought the dictator down. If only the speaker of the house had some balls.
electricphoto wrote on December 11, 2007 2:58 PM:What good is investigating, when what you find, never makes it to the press and when you find wrong doing you run as fast as you can from enforcing any legal remedies for laws that were broken?
Talk is cheap... action?
pleonasm wrote on December 11, 2007 7:32 PM:Putting a special counsel on the case would show that they're serious.
p_lukasiak wrote on December 11, 2007 7:32 PM:Asking the DOJ to handle it is a bit much even for these two.
Well, here is the first question I'd ask...
"In a October 25th court filing related to the Moussaui case, three Justice Department lawyers acknowledged seeing, in September 2007, two videotaped detainee interogations that predated May 2003. Are you even certain that all copies of these interrogation tapes in question have been destroyed?"
ken melvin wrote on December 11, 2007 8:32 PM:What's specter going to do? Gum his leg? Specter will naught other impede.
Admiral Fallon wrote on December 12, 2007 4:19 AM:Murkasey, wasn't he involved in the cover-ups surrounding the 1993 World Trade Center bombing?
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_news&Number=295944591&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=21&part=&vc=1
Iran War: American Military Versus Israel Firsters
Secondly the Zion-Cons do not have an exit strategy because they believe the US should stay, colonize, build bases and engage in a prolonged war for a chimerical total victory.
The question of ‘who commands the Commander in Chief’ goes to the entire core of our constitutional order, because it raises the deeper question of ‘who defines the national interests’ for which the military are fighting? If as we have documented, the ZPC has effectively colonized the White House and Legislative Branches (and the Justice Department and the appointment of an ultra-Zionist Attorney General Michael Mulkasey and Israel-First Head of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff), to serve the interests of a foreign power (Israel) in what sense does a colonized political system serve the interests of a democratic public?
Wexfreege wrote on December 15, 2007 12:46 AM:The mission of the your site.
gllwng wrote on December 15, 2007 1:40 AM:Hi, I have been looking for better choices for cheaper travel than the big outfits who have all the same results and prices.
WoorbspoobRek wrote on December 25, 2007 2:07 PM:I like http://www.cheap-discount-airfare.com but does anyone else have suggestions?
Thanks for the interesting and informative site. That’s definitely what I’ve been looking for.