Columns, Congress, Constitutional Law, Criminal law, Military, Politics, Society

Gina Haspel’s CIA Nomination Is A Women’s Milestone We’d Be Wise To Avoid

440px-Gina_Haspel_official_CIA_portraitBelow is my column in USA Today on the nomination Deputy Director Gina Haspel to head the CIA.  While Sen. Rand Paul has declared that he will oppose Haspel over torture, some Democrats (who are being criticized for previously failing to act on torture allegations) are again hedging on whether they will oppose a nominee solely due to her involvement in the torture program.  However, one promising development is an effort by Sen. Dianne Feinstein to have Haspel’s record on torture declassified. There remains some debate over Haspel’s role on notable cases.  Reports still indicate that Haspel oversaw the torture of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri at the “Cat’s Eye.”  However, it is not clear if she was “Chief of Base” during the torture of Abu Zubaydah.  ProPublica issued a correction Thursday that she was not Chief at the time of the Zubaydah torture.  There is no debate that Haspel ordered the destruction of evidence of the torture program.

Here is the column (which has been edited since its original posting):

 

The firing of Rex Tillerson occupied much of the news yesterday as shocked anchors recounted how the Secretary of State was effectively dispatched by a single Trump tweet. The shock, however, should not be over Twitter but torture. Once CIA Director Mike Pompeo replaces Tillerson, President Donald Trump wants Pompeo’s second in command to take over the CIA: Deputy Director Gina Haspel.

Most people have no idea who Haspel is. She is, however, well-known to human rights advocates and civil libertarians around the world. Haspel was not simply a key figure in the torture program run by the Bush administration, she headed one of the infamous foreign black sites and was accused of knowingly destroying evidence of the torture carried out on her watch.

After years of Congress and former Bush officials denouncing the torture program, the confirmation of Haspel would reaffirm that torture as not simply acceptable but a potential path to promotion in the United States. Trump has declared the possible confirmation of the agency’s first female director as a “historic milestone.” Given her role in the torture program, however, Haspel’s confirmation would be equally historic and one milestone we would be wise to avoid.

The torture program approved by former president George W. Bush on Sept. 17, 2001, represented one of the most infamous moments in our history. The Justice Department memo used to justify the program was ultimately denounced by the Justice Departmentas seriously flawed and withdrawn. The program was ultimately closed as both Republicans and Democrats belatedly lined up to pledge to block any such program in the future. On Dec. 30, 2005, the Detainee Treatment Act was passed to reaffirm the long-established fact that waterboarding is torture and torture is a violation of not just international law but United States law.

The shocking accounts of the U.S. torture program destroyed the credibility of the United States and emboldened our enemies in China and other countries in their own use of torture. Among these shocking accounts was the torture of Abu Zubayda. Zubayda was the subject of one of the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition programs” where suspects were taken to foreign locations were they were tortured. Haspel was the “Chief of Base” at the Thai torture site known as CIA’s “Cat’s Eye.”

Zubayda was waterboarded 83 times in one month. He was denied sleep, forced into a small coffin-like box for long periods of time and physically abused, including having his head slammed into walls. The CIA reportedly got nothing from the torture.

Accounts of the torture sessions describe “fluid intake and involuntary leg, chest and arm spasms” and “hysterical pleas.” Zubaydah “became completely unresponsive, with bubbles rising through his open, full mouth.” None of that mattered even when Zubaydah could no longer communicate and lost consciousness. There was only one person who could stop suchh sessions: chief of base Haspel.  There is no indication that she used that authority.

Haspel’s defense has always been that she was merely following orders. Putting aside the troubling history of that defense (and the rejection of the defense by the United States in prior war crime prosecutions), Haspel relied on the torture memos by John Yoo and Jay Bybee — later rejected by the Justice Department as seriously flawed because they misrepresented governing legal standards. Haspel made direct reference to that legal cover in one of her dispatches on July 2002:

“Team is ready to move to the next phase of interrogations immediately upon receipt of approvals/authorization from ALEC/Headquarters. It is our understanding that DOJ/Attorney General approvals for all portions of the next phase, including the water board, have been secured, but that final approval is in the hands of the policy makers.”

However, if Haspel was confident of the legality of her actions, it was not evident when she was promoted back at Langley. As the world was learning of the torture program and members of Congress demanded a special prosecutor, Haspel dispatched orders in 2005 for tapes of the torture sessions involving her to be destroyed. Her orders were part of a comprehensive effort to destroy evidence of the programs so neither courts nor Congress could use them against officials like herself.

Virtually all of those members of Congress who are now demanding obstruction investigations and charges in the Russian controversy did nothing. Haspel, her boss Jose Rodriguez, and others got away with destroying evidence of allegedly criminal conduct. Haspel’s role is so notorious that the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights has been pushing Germany’s public prosecutor to arrest Haspel for violations of international law.

Her use of “enhanced interrogation” may not have produced much actionable intelligence, but certainly enhanced her career. Haspel ultimately received the George H.W. Bush Award for excellence in counterterrorism, the Donovan Award, the Intelligence Medal of Merit and the Presidential Rank Award. (She was not alone on the career fast track: Torture memo author Jay Bybee would be given a lifetime appointment as a Ninth Circuit judge.)

The one thing to Trump’s credit in this controversy is that he is at least honest. Trump has never adopted the euphemism of “enhanced interrogation” for waterboarding. He has called it for what it is: “torture.” During the campaign, Trump declared “torture … works.” It certainly has worked for Gina Haspel.

Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University, where he teaches constitutional and tort law. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley.

171 thoughts on “Gina Haspel’s CIA Nomination Is A Women’s Milestone We’d Be Wise To Avoid”

  1. https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/974392412595466240

    Torture was and still is against US law. And she liked doing it. Torture is designed for extracting confessions. Many times our soldiers were put in harms way following “leads” from people who would say anything to make the torture stop.

    Our Constitution expresslly forbids torture. So if you want you 1st and 2nd amendment rights you need to stop supporting the abrogation of the Constutituion. This kind of unethical action in the world has made this nation the sh*THole it now is.

    It is not “manly” to rape, murder, pull out fingernails, shock, wall, drown or otherwise harm people who are in custody. Those are the actions of sadists and cowards. If this is what you want your country to do, shame on you.

    1. Jill:

      “Our Constitution expresslly forbids torture.”

      *********************

      Where? The Eighth Amendment applies to post-conviction “cruel and unusual” punishment.

      1. mespo,

        Here is Patrick Henry: “Patrick Henry asserted, even more pointedly than Holmes, that the lack of a prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments meant that Congress could use punishment as a tool of oppression: “Congress . . . . may introduce the practice of France, Spain, and Germany of torturing, to extort a confession of the crime. They . . . will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must . . . extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone.”

        Here is the actual wording of the 8th amendment: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

        You must also be unaware that we signed and ratified a treaty which is legally binding on our govt. against the use of torture under any circumstances.

        1. Then it just falls on your definition of torture. Pouring water on someone does not qualify as torture in my book.

          1. Jim,

            That is just a really stupid statement. I think you know that waterboarding is not pouring water on someone. You make a mockery of other’s pain and death. Aren’t you proud of yourself for being the kind of person who doesn’t mind cruelty and horrible death as long as it’s someone elses. I know you’ve certainly impressed me.

      2. Mespo, Antonin Scolia asserted that it applies only after conviction but I don’t believe the SC as a while has decided. Since the rest of the 8th amendment includes “cruel and unusual punishment” in the same phrase as”excessive bail shall not be required,” I disagree. I would argue that cruel and unusual punishment applies to any time a person is in government custody and care.

    2. “It is not “manly” to rape, murder, pull out fingernails, shock, wall, drown or otherwise harm people who are in custody”

      Who specifically was raped, murdered, had finger nails pulled out or drowned?

      1. Jim22,

        Not that I think you really care: Yasser Talal al-Zahrani of Yemen, and Salah Ahmed al-Salami and Mani Shaman al-Utaybi, Ali Shallal al-Qaisi,and Manadel al-Jamadi for starters. Look into it if you do actually care to know (or aren’t pretneding to not know).

        1. So all of these, I assume terrorists, were raped and murdered? Seems surprising that this isn’t bigger news.

          1. . Pouring water on someone does not qualify as torture in my book. -Hot Air

            You’re pretty big and pretty brave, HA, especially for someone who has never experienced Water Boarding.

            Pretty obvious you are full of it. Waaay ful of it. You should check in with conservative Erich “Mancow” Muller. Unlike you, he puts his mouth where the water is.

          2. Jim 22,

            You are really ignorant or at least you pretend to be. You are assuming these people were terrorists. Only a trial, which they never had, would give you that information. Most of the people were taken off the street or handed over for a $5000.00 payoff. It has ended up that very few people in Gitmo, for example, had anything to do with anything. (See Seton Hall law school.)

            I think you know why this isn’t bigger news. It doesn’t fit the narrative of terrorism and it would implicate the US in untold gruesome war crimes. The information is obtainable if you cared enough to know the truth. I assume, from everything you write, that you don’t care what happens to other people. Some day, it could happen that others will not care about you. Do unto others and all that crap!

            1. P.S. Since you support the same actions as terrorists, what makes you any better? You should follow the rule of law and care about the Constitution. Those who love torture do neither.

  2. The title of Turley’s original post on this thread would have us suppose that the appointment of Gina Haspel to be Director of the CIA would be “women’s milestone.” One might presume that Turley is being strictly sarcastic in that supposition, were it not for the established pattern of Turley’s complaints on the topic of women’s sexism. Evidently, Turley cannot resist the opportunity to quip at the expense of women even when Turley knows that said quip is quite perfectly irrelevant to the use of torture as an interrogation technique.

    Worse, still, we get the obligatory damning of Trump with the faintest of all possible praise:

    “The one thing to Trump’s credit in this controversy is that he is at least honest. Trump has never adopted the euphemism of “enhanced interrogation” for waterboarding. He has called it for what it is: “torture.” During the campaign, Trump declared “torture … works.”

    May we please presume that Turley is being sarcastic about that observation? It’s getting harder and harder to tell with Turley.

    1. A Harvard education professor was front and center pushing the school testing regime promoted by the donor class. I was shocked to see a $1,000,000 grant from the Gates Foundation on his c.v

  3. More gift items to buy at the Trump MAGA store
    (1) a waterboarding game
    (2) a matryosha set of nesting dolls depicting the Trump family
    (3) tighty whitetys with “Stormy” embroidered on them
    (3) prison wear

  4. Maybe she will be the one that gets all the drug dealers that Trump wants to kill, if he starts with the CEO’s of big pharma maybe I would support her waterboarding some of those SOB’s.

  6. Obama wasn’t a sweet little angel when he embraced the drone assassination program.

    There were ten times more air strikes in the covert war on terror during President Barack Obama’s presidency than under his predecessor, George W. Bush.

    Obama embraced the US drone programme, overseeing more strikes in his first year than Bush carried out during his entire presidency. A total of 563 strikes, largely by drones, targeted Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen during Obama’s two terms, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. Between 384 and 807 civilians were killed in those countries.

    1. Obama found our enemies that were attacking the US, Dubya could care less. Remember?

    2. So what? Does that justify or excuse Bush? Or is it not more accurate, never mind to the point, to say that Obama was a war criminal right along with Bush?

      BTW, in 1776 we attempted to break from the whole tradition of divine right of Kings to create, alter, or break laws when and as they pleased. We were NOT simply turning around and giving divine rights to our executive branch. That applies as much to Bush II and his viscous little team of blood thirsty lawyers, as it does to Obama and his lethal contemptuous extra judicial assassinations.

  7. If this was 1946 and she was a Kraut, she would be on trial at Nuremberg.

  8. CIA…KGB… B I Bicki eye bye Oh Bee, bicki eye bicki Oh boo boo!

    Give her a job as cook at the White House. Let her clean the Girls Room. Twice on Sundays. Jeso.

  9. There’s quite a difference between water boarding and the rack; electrocution, being drawn and quartered or having your head cut off! Please!

  11. Pingback: Gina Haspel’s CIA Nomination Is A Women’s Milestone We’d Be Wise To Avoid — JONATHAN TURLEY – www.salmanbhaijaan.com

  13. Pro Publica in the last few days has walked back – and apologized for – its prior allegation that Haspel was in charge during torture time. I know not whether she ordered destruction of records in a cover-up..

  15. No posts yet from the regulars here who likely approve of the above described torture. Maybe because there IS no legal, moral, nor ethical defense of torture? “Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat,” as dear Bullwinkel often said to Rocky the squirrel.

    Strangely, after all the above condemnation of torture, IIRC Geezus Soetoro Obama still maintained the right to torture if/when he personally authorizes it for “national defense.” Please correct if wrong.

    On a related matter, lacking any judicial charge Geezus also assassinated two American citizens via drone, Anwar Al-Awlaki and his age 16 son with the same name. Now, if THAT’s legal (he suffered no consequence) then how and why is Turley concerned with torture? Extra judicial drone incineration good, torture bad? Really? ” ‘Splain Lucy!”

    Lastly, several years ago NPR interviewed a professor at the US War College Re. the subject of POTUS’ legal authority to kill whoever he deems necessary to defend the US. As a legal matter, if POTUS killed everyone on earth except for a handful of US citizens for him to continue his role, he suffers no legal liability, none, zip, nada.

    1. Best contest ever filmed at Kezar Stadium. Scorpio was the baddest of the bad — especially when he commandeered the school bus. Sick ‘em Harry!

      1. I don’t kn ow about the stadium, but I can just imagine somebody putting Trump’s head on Clint, and then uploading this. Because Trump is the kind of man who is used to getting things done, instead of waffling around and mealy-mouthing.

        Which, is why the pansy Liberals hate him so much.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        2. It’s really interesting that there seem to be so many right-wing followers of Turley. Surely you have more compatible blogs to play around with. Or is it just that you all want to give Turley the finger?

          1. This is da first T rump appointee Turley has opposed. He is on board with most of da T rump agenda. Rulight wingers seem him as a Fox and Friends ally.

              1. Support T rump’s actions are on Fox. Never condemns white nationalists.

          2. RDKAY – why would we want to give JT the finger? We like playing in his sandbox, Don’t you?

  17. What she did was legal when she did it. That later DOJ memos changed that is not her fault. She knows the culture of the CIA and will take no prisoners from within. She is a perfect fit.

    1. All legally signed US Treaties are part of and legally equal to the US Constitution. The US Congress and POTUS both signed the Geneva Convention, which defines water boarding as illegal torture. Haspel and everyone associated with the torture committed multiple crimes.

      Psychiatrists or mental health “experts” wrote at least one note in support of the Bush/Cheney Krime Syndikat’s torture program. Those “experts” also committed felony crimes, and AFAIK none even lost their professional license.

      Crime certainly does pay when members of the ruling class commit it.

      Michael Scheuer still praises the rendition program. The persons responsible for the above described felony crimes never described one actual bit of useful info that came from the torture, though they lie on cue making general statements to the contrary. Further, many good and honest persons who were there swear that not one bit of useful info came from the tortures, IOW, they call their then-coworkers who disagree liars.

      Who do you believe? Who has a reason to lie and who has absolutely no reason to make up a lie?

      1. Joseph Jones – we waterboard our own SEAL team members so they know what it is like. Is that torture? I find Maxine Waters voice torturous. Can I have her voice box removed under the Geneva Convention? When we first signed the Geneva Convention, I do not think waterboarding was listed. I think it is an add-on.

    2. I agree with Paul. Haspel is an excellent choice–exactly whom we need at this point in history. Turley is absolutely wrong on this one!

    3. PCS

      Yes, indeed. All patriotic Americans support the use of torture…but only when it’s necessary. Isn’t that something that even school children are taught is partly what keeps America the great envy of the world?

      1. billmcwilliams – the first job of any nation is survival. Sometimes you have to do what it takes to make that happen. Would I like terrorists to give up information when we asked them pretty please? Yes, I would, but that is not real life. Some require more extreme measures and I approve of using those methods to get the info we need.

        If terrorists do not wish to be tortured, then they need to give us the information right away.

  18. I think Turley is appealing to the wrong crowd here. I doubt there are many objections to the torture of Muslims, maybe it could even be extended to illegal aliens?

    1. Enigma:
      I’m absolutely certain that if you were faced with a life or torture situation you’d happily sacrifice your fellow Americans in service to your liberal sense of propriety. You’d do well to recall that self-defense is the paramount right from which most every other Right flows. And moreso, that every right yields to extreme necessity. I’m no fan of torture but when it comes to survival, I’d never rule it out especially when dealing the barbarians we now face.

      1. mespo – And when the definition of “life and torture” expands to anyone who looks like a threat, we end up where we were.
        I was just saying Turley was not in tune with this audience who doesn’t want torture removed from the bag of tricks and I’m pretty sure I’m not wrong.

        1. And where we are is that torture is still illegal. It’s justifucation is darn narrow, as it should be. And nobody is clamoring to expand its use.

            1. T rump is for torture. T urley parted ways on one issue. Hooray Hooray

      2. You’d do well to recall that self-defense is the paramount right from which most every other Right flows.

        I’m sure you are aware that the same people arguing against any use of torture are the same people that would willingly support our government infringing the rights of our own citizens if it enhanced their cause. Many of these idiots deny natural rights even exist. Many of them will gleefully tell you that all rights come from government. But apparently, when that government (not their party) makes it legal to take away rights, then all of a sudden they no longer support the use of the power they ignorantly gave them. If they want to give government the power to make security of rights a la carte, then sometimes the government just might not be to their taste.

        By the way, they’d be lying if they wouldn’t want any means necessary used, and that includes torture, to save themselves or their family from the hands of terrorists.

          1. So conversely, nobody’s principled when they do have skin in the game? Sounds a lot like human nature. BTW, everyone has skin in the game. They either don’t know it, or lack the humility to accept it.

              1. mespo – at my age, one of the questions on my annual physical is: how many times did you fall down in the last year? I do try to keep it to zero. Getting old is not for the faint of heart. 😉

    2. Well, I wouldn’t want to just go around torturing Muzzies because they were Muzzies. But if they were terrorists, then hell yes if it helps resolve something. Other than that, I believe in very humane treatment of war prisoners.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      2. Leaving aside the immorality of the issue, how do you droolers fail to believe the experts; the military and intelligence professionals who uniformally state that torture is not effective; that it only gets what the torturer wants to hear? Since you mouth-breathers are obviously aware of this uncontroverted fact, that leaves only the option that you just want torture for torture’s sake. “Beware that when fighting monsters, you yourself don’t become a monster.”

        this is to “but hannity doesn’t quote Nietzsche” SqueeKKK

        2. Marky Mark Mark – you are aware that the CIA is still sending assets to rendition sites to be tortured? Evidently, the Clowns In America think it still works. Go out to the Dark Web, it is fascinating what you will find there.

    3. enigmainblackcom

      JT knows his audience well. Nearly all of the customers here enthusiastically support the use of torture – and they can easily rationalize it…at the drop of a hat. No sissies HERE!

      2. billmcwillimas:

        If it’s the only choice, better extremism in self-defense than pusillanimity.

        “I call an animal, a species, an individual corrupt, when it loses its instincts, when it prefers what is injurious to it.” ~Nietzsche.

  19. She’s perfect. Following orders that were given by the Administration at the time doesn’t disqualify her.

      1. Failed Again!!!

        Full Sensorship of the 1st is On, Some are saying… Whatever the Phk you think…..

        Or search: Rammstein – Rammvier / PROSHOT HD (Pinkpop Festival 2016)

    3. Tried and lost at Nuremberg. I’m sure Hannity has told you it’s okay, though.

      this is to “Hannity is my truth whisperer” shannon

      1. Marky Mark Mark – I know you went to a lower tiered law school, but even they should have taught you that the Nuremberg Defense works if you think the order is legal and lawful.

  20. Only the federal government can take a nice positive word like “enhance” and give it a negative connotation in a short amount of time.

    Enhanced interrogation
    Enhanced screening
    Enhanced pat down

    We’re gonna need another word.

Comments are closed.