Posted on 05/15/2018 8:27:45 PM PDT by Kaslin
The ballgame is over on Gina Haspel’s confirmation battle. She’s President Trump’s nominee for CIA director. She will be the first female director in the agency’s history. Nevertheless, the process has been a mini-war on women, with dedicated left-wingers pushing the usual talking point: ‘yeah, she’s a woman, but she’s not a real woman.' Translation: only liberal women can be true feminists and only liberal women can benefit from feminism. Oh, and if you’re nominated by a Republican, especially Trump, you’re Satan, or something. Yet, she’s been able to clinch some Democrats, as Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) and Rand Paul (R-KY) have voiced their opposition to her nomination; McCain already put a the GOP in a shaky position, given that he’s unable to vote due to his brain cancer fight.
4 Dem Senators now backing Haspel's nomination to become CIA Dir. Dem ND Sen Heitkamp the latest. Others are Warner, Donnelly & Manchin— Chad Pergram (@ChadPergram) May 15, 2018
Yet, Haspel can now breath a sigh of relief. Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) announced his support of Ms. Haspel, who along with Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV), Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), Joe Donnelly (D-IN), put her nomination over the top (via WaPo):
Gina Haspel appears to have secured enough votes to be confirmed as the country’s next CIA director after stating in a letter to a top Democrat that the agency never should have detained terrorist suspects and employed brutal interrogation techniques against them.
Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) said Tuesday that he had asked Haspel to write down her views because he believed that in one-on-one meetings she had expressed greater regret, and more resolute moral opposition to the agency’s interrogation program than she had communicated during her confirmation hearing last week.
“I believe she is someone who can and will stand up to the President if ordered to do something illegal or immoral — like a return to torture,” Warner said in a statement, citing his past interaction with Haspel and the overwhelming support for her among the agency’s rank and file. He added that he also had “respect” for those “who have made a different decision” about her nomination.
Warner’s support for Haspel provides more opportunity for her to gain the backing of other lawmakers who were on the fence about her nomination.
This whole fight was odd. Haspel is a lifelong intelligence operative, whose credentials are impeccable. Yet, her qualifications are not in question. It was her time at the CIA when the enhanced interrogation program was in effect. For a little bit, the Democratic Party suffered a bit of amnesia over waterboarding, which they knew about prior to the program going into effect. One of those Democrats was Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA):
She was one of the first Americans outside the Agency to learn of the enhanced interrogation program. Did she resign in protest? Leak to the media? Loudly condemn the practice upon learning of it?
She did none of these things. According to the New York Times, interrogations began in March 2002. Pelosi was one of four members of Congress briefed on the procedures that September. The congressmen, reported the Washington Post, were "given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk," including waterboarding. No one raised objections. "Instead," the Post continues, "at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said." The next year, when she was read into the program, Democrat Jane Harman wrote a letter protesting interrogations. No such correspondence came from Pelosi.
In fact, Pelosi knew about enhanced interrogation before Gina Haspel did. At her confirmation hearing, Haspel told Susan Collins that she did not learn of the program "until about a year into its existence." That was months after Congress had been informed. "I was told that interrogation experts had designed the program, that the highest legal authority in the United States had approved it, and that the president of the United States had approved it as well as trusted leadership at the Central Intelligence Agency," Haspel said.
Haspel was an employee of the president of the United States. But Nancy Pelosi was in a position to make moral judgments. She had no obligation or responsibility to George W. Bush. She could have raised a ruckus if she wanted to—it's not like she was worried she might ruin her friendship with the president.
So why should Gina Haspel—a long-time, highly capable, well regarded civil servant who would be the first female director of central intelligence and enjoys the support of both Republican and Democratic national security officials—pay for her involvement in a program to which Nancy Pelosi voiced no objection until it became politically convenient?
I can't think of a reason. And I doubt Democrats can think of a reason, either. As Tom Cotton pointed out, if they really held to the standard that no one who had knowledge of interrogations should hold high office, why did Democrats vote to confirm John Brennan as CIA director?
And therein rests the hypocrisy. Virtually the entire Democratic caucus, and McCain, voted for John Brennan for CIA director, who was also a top CIA official when this program was in effect. Brennan later said a lot of useful information was obtained through this method.
This was all about being against Haspel because Trump nominated her. If Obama had nominated her if the opportunity came around, she would have been praised as a glass-ceiling breaker. As it turns out, being anti-Trump for the sake of being anti-Trump is not a sustainable line of attack, nor a smart strategy—especially when Obama’s intelligence fully endorsed Haspel’s confirmation.
Rand Paul thinks that Haspel is a protegee of John Brennan. That’s not good news if true.
Waterboarding is a moot point. It’s no longer in place, so it can’t be abolished. If it’s being implemented, it’ll be in some third-world aligned hole where the spooks normally do much worse, and nobody would know about it, and the brass don’t mind so long as they have deniability. Besides, it’s not all that effective, I’ve heard, because it’s not hard-core enough.
You know...it’s torture if places like Guantanamo aren’t ran like a Holiday Inn.
I see your point and it’s a good one.
Waterboarding is just a catchy Virtue Signal that the ‘Rats send out to their dopey base...and also John McCain, LOL!
There are PLENTY of other effective torture techniques, as anyone who has spent ANY amount of time in the military already knows.
So? No more waterboarding...that we’ll ever HEAR of again. ;)
Just because the CIA doesn’t put a towel over someones mouth and pour water on their face, doesn’t mean that one of our intel partners won’t.
But is it possible that she is a swamp creature?
What did she know about Obama's plot to SPY ON THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN, THEN PRESIDENCY and WHEN DID SHE LEARN ABOUT IT?
Rand Paul has a point. He asked her in writing what she knew about Brennan spying on the Trump campaign and on the transitional presidency. Paul also thinks that Hasprey was a Brennan protegee. I am not altogether sold on her.
yeah i dunno- my spidey senses are acting up for some reason over her- maybe it’s nothing- but I just didn’t like how she caved like she did- maybe I’m overly cautious, and perhaps it was just a strategic capitulation to get the votes- but i dunno-
I knew/know nothing about her.
She had two things going her:
1. The rabid treatment by the hate America mediots on tv and our fishwrap bsers.
2. The same treatment by the Hate America Democrats.
“I can’t think of a reason.”
That’s easy. Because...Trump.
I would have also asked her what is the evidence for "Russian meddling" other than a few dumb FB ads and posting bots. But of course she would not have given a real answer.
F McCain. Of all people he knows what REAL torture is. He’s just being a dick to the bitter end. He looks for every opening where he can gum up the works.
“I didn’t like her caving on the waterboarding issue- said ‘it never should have happened’-”
Darn now we’ll have to let someone else do it for us...and maybe a little more rigorously in their own ways. Perhaps the Comanche, Jicarilla Apache, Navajo, or Oglala Sioux nations would oblige? I’m sure Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia etc would be delighted to help.Nothing like a little threat of rendition to start a conversation.
“I didn’t like her caving on the waterboarding issue- said ‘it never should have happened’-”
Darn now we’ll have to let someone else do it for us...and maybe a little more rigorously in their own ways. Perhaps the Comanche, Jicarilla Apache, Navajo, or Oglala Sioux nations would oblige? I’m sure Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia etc would be delighted to help.Nothing like a little threat of rendition to start a conversation.
Excellent!
Same thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.