Another Dem (Rockefeller) casts doubt on CIA briefing memo

[kpete]

Source: Politico

Another Dem casts doubt on CIA briefing memo

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), who was chairman of the intelligence committee in 2002, is the latest Democrat to seriously question the accuracy of the CIA memo detailing Congressional briefings on waterboarding and enhanced interrogations.

In my reporting for the Pelosi piece this morning, co-written with John Bresnahan, a Rockefeller aide took issue with two characterizations made in the memo, which was requested by House Republicans and released by CIA director Leon Panetta last week.

First, Rockefeller thinks the date listed -- Feb. 4, 2003 -- is misleading. The date comes with an asterisk, indicating that Rockefeller wasn't present and was "later" briefed individually. It turned out to be much later:

The aide Emails me:

*****We are not in a position to vouch for the accuracy of the document. We can tell you that in the particular entry stating that Senator Rockefeller was briefed on February 4th of 2003 with an asterisk also noting him as later individually briefed -- that is not correct, or at least is not being reported correctly by people reading the document. The Democratic staff director attended a briefing on Feb. 4, but Senator Rockefeller was not present and was not later briefed individually by anyone in the intelligence community. He was first personally briefed by the intelligence community on Sept 4th, 2003.

Second, the senator takes issue with the description of the briefing as providing details of IETs.

*****Senator Rockefeller has repeatedly stated he was not told critical information that would have cast significant doubt on the program’s legality and effectiveness. With more information coming to light in 2004, Senator Rockefeller became increasingly concerned about the program, and in early 2005 he launched a full-scale effort to investigate. The Senate Intelligence Committee's review is ongoing and he believes it is critically important that there be a full accounting of the Bush Administration's interrogation policies.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Another_Dem_casts_doubt_on_CIA_briefing_memo.html

[rfranklin]

1. Pretty obvious that this was the CYA memo concocted by Cheney

and his group of henchmen.

[aquart]

4. And it's been beautifully effective judging by the reaction here.

[Metta]

2. Good for him. He's also covering for his appaling 911 Commission participation.

Hope you do the right thing, Senator. Happy karma.

[Soylent Brice]

3. you know, it appears that public opinion doesn't give a shit who knew,

i think people are more interested to see if anyone will be prosecuted.

interesting to see the Dems actually arguing the authenticity though. it sounds like they're more concerned about timeline, rather than whether they knew or not, which is a bit unsettling.

[bemildred]

6. Anybody that didn't know, didn't want to know.

I knew, and I'm nobody, not a Congressperson, nobody. They weren't hiding it. The whole point of it was the threat to do it to you too.

[No Elephants]

5. A "full scale" EFFORT to investigate? What the heck does

that mean? Either you investigate or you don't. You don't try to investigate and you certainly don't launch a full-scale attempt to investigate.

Does this say that an investigation of torture begun early in 2005 is still ongoing? Or are they talking about two different reviews of EIT?

not sure what this is supposed to be telling us. Is this obfuscation or just poor writing?

[Soylent Brice]

7. i saw that as: " we normally half-ass everything, as you can see,

so this time we really super duper promise to try our bestest not to fuck this one up."