Start Snitchin'

How, you wonder, does the CIA get away with something like destroying video evidence of illegal activity? Surely there's some congressional oversight. Well, as it turns out, there sort of is: Senator Jay Rockefeller and Rep. Jane Harman knew some of what was going on and were maybe kinda sorta upset about it, but they didn't take any public action of the sort that might have actually prevented the evidence from being destroyed. As Marty Lederman observes, "Jay Rockefeller is constantly learning of legally dubious (at best) CIA intelligence activities, and then saying nothing about them publicly until they are leaked to the press, at which point he expresses outrage and incredulity -- but reveals nothing."

The Democratic leadership really needs to start taking these Intel Committee postings more seriously. These are jobs that require smart, savvy, credible people who are prepared to wield the authority of their offices effectively. The country, by necessity, is going to have intelligence services who do a lot of things in the dark with someone minimal oversight. The burden of doing that oversight falls on the intelligence committees, and it's an extremely important job. Time and again Rockefeller looks not ready for prime time.

Comments

Well said. That letter Rockafella scribbled to the White House after hearing about the egregiously illegal warrantless wiretapping is truly a document for the ages.

Posted by fnook | December 7, 2007 2:07 PM

(THE WIRE SPOILER ALERT)

I love the graphic, but don't you think if these two start snitchin' their house will get firebombed like Randy from the Wire?

Posted by George W | December 7, 2007 2:16 PM

Yeah, just give Bush and successors more excuses to deny information to appropriately cleared Members of Congress.

Posted by cuqui | December 7, 2007 2:24 PM

Can we convince Waxman to move into this role in the House? And how do we get the leadership to move Rockefeller out in the Senate? It will never happen (the political implications would be too significant in a state like West Virginia) but maybe we can dig up some man-on-dog sex photos or something. God knows Rick Santorum could tell us where to start looking.

Posted by Augie | December 7, 2007 2:38 PM

cuqui, if they're not going to do anything with the information when they get it, even when it's monstrously illegal, what's the point?

Posted by Sam | December 7, 2007 2:43 PM

Remember the uproar when it leaked that Pelosi might replace Harman on the Intelligence Committee?

Go for it Nancy.

Posted by Davebo | December 7, 2007 2:53 PM

Contrarian view: Harman and Rockefeller may have inadvertently done as all a favor. The act of destroying evidence itself is sufficiently pernicious to add fuel to the fire for the critics of American Authoritarianism (AA.). And now the United States -- and her enemies worldwide -- don't have to actually see yet more stomach-turning evidence of how low the country has sunk. I mean, the object is to bring down the AA state, right, and not dissipate our last remaining shreds of soft power?

Obviously one agrees with the Matt's general point. We got lucky this time the evidence-destroying was leaked. And one's regard for Nancy Pelosi is now affirmed.

Posted by Pokey | December 7, 2007 2:57 PM

Personally, I'd like to see an interpretation of the Speech and Debate clause under which Rockefeller and Harman, and other aware committee members, could be indicted, convicted, and sentenced to life in prison for obstruction of justice and criminal conspiracy, because that's exactly what's happened here. A 2/3 vote in their respective Houses to remove them from their seats would do fine as an alternative. And yes, I'd like a pony, too.

Given that none of that will happen, I'll settle for reassignment to newly established committees on Cheetos™ and wine box procurement.

Posted by R Johnston | December 7, 2007 2:59 PM

This is all just further proof that the Democrats are no better than the Republicans. Both have been covering for the Bush administration since the beginning of 2001.

What we have earned for it is over 3,000 dead American soldiers (plus many others on both sides also killed and wounded) all for a pack of lies designed to get complete control of the Middle East oil.

Saddly, the rest of the world sees it while most Americans still do not - thanks for that goes to the mainstream media of this nation.

Rockefeller has moaned and groaned over the fact that the investigation of the Senate Select Committee on what the White House knew and didn't know prior to 9/11, was being stonewalled by Sen. Pat Roberts. But one has to wonder now whether Sen, Rockefeller wasn't also a part of the stalling himself.

You don't have to be a blind conservative not to see it, just an ignorant one to deny it.

Posted by Dennis | December 7, 2007 3:10 PM

The presumption seems to be that the Intel Committee chairs and rankers have to be either soft as baby-shit, or in the tank for the spooks. Or both.

The oversight is then in the hands of Judiciary, and those Judiciary Committee members with access to Intel Committee material are bound to secrecy, meaning that they can only address things like, say, deliberate destruction of potential criminal evidence or illegal wiretapping after the news leaks out.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | December 7, 2007 3:16 PM

If we hung a few of these people by the neck until dead as the war criminals that they are, perhaps some of their successors might start taking their responsibilities seriously.

Posted by LarryM | December 7, 2007 3:30 PM

Why characterize this as Rockefeller just not ready for the job? Like the vast majority of Republicans since 2000 he has decided to carry water for Bushco rather than be a representative of the people. We wouldn't know whether he was up to the job or not since he has decided not to do it.

Don't facilitate the easy out for these slime who have abetted our government's crimes.

Posted by Sigh | December 7, 2007 3:34 PM

@ Sigh - 3:34 pm

A major error in you post: Sen. John D. ("Jay") Rockefeller IV (WV) is a Democrat, not a Republican.

Still no excuse for his water-carrying, though. None whatsoever.

Posted by Jay C | December 7, 2007 3:51 PM

@ Sigh - 3:34 pm

A major error in you post: Sen. John D. ("Jay") Rockefeller IV (WV) is a Democrat, not a Republican.

Still no excuse for his water-carrying, though. None whatsoever.

Posted by Jay C | December 7, 2007 3:52 PM

@ Sigh - 3:34 pm

A major error in you post: Sen. John D. ("Jay") Rockefeller IV (WV) is a Democrat, not a Republican.

Still no excuse for his water-carrying, though. None whatsoever.

Posted by Jay C | December 7, 2007 3:54 PM

"maybe we can dig up some man-on-dog sex photos or something."

Think about that.

Who has more of those photos than anybody? The CIA and the FBI. And they update them constantly. We KNOW Echelon has been used to listen in on domestic political calls, no matter the endless denials from the NSA.

These Congressmen don't fight the intelligence and law enforcement people because they know they're vulnerable to leaks of their own criminal or embarrassing activity.

Hoover at the FBI had files on everybody and didn't hesitate to use them. Does anybody think that's changed?

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | December 7, 2007 6:02 PM

Well, you know, Matt, if Rockfeller WAS ready for prime time, he wouldn't get reelected in West Virginia. In every previous campaign in which he's shown any backbone whatsoever, he's either lost (1972) or come close to being upset (1984). Like Clinton and Al Gore, he realized long ago that he was living in a Southern (i.e., barbarian) state.

Posted by Bruce Moomaw | December 7, 2007 8:14 PM

Isn't it true that most Americans--deep, deep down inside and whether they admit it publicly or not--are actually glad to see their enemies get tortured? I mean the major media huffed and puffed about (forgive my spelling) Abu Graib, but they blew no houses down. If the American public were honestly opposed to torture, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and then-Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld would have been thrown out of office a long time ago. I sense not a small bit of hypocrisy on this issue.

Posted by Timothy A. Ruane | December 7, 2007 9:18 PM

Well, as I think Tim Leary once said, if the average American was made President, he'd run the country like Idi Amin.

I don't doubt it.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | December 7, 2007 11:34 PM

Isn't it true that most Americans--deep, deep down inside and whether they admit it publicly or not--are actually glad to see their enemies get tortured?

No, not in my experience.

Posted by fnook | December 7, 2007 11:49 PM

Isn't it true that most Americans--deep, deep down inside and whether they admit it publicly or not--are actually glad to see their enemies get tortured?

Ugh!!! No. What would make you think that? That is horrific!

Posted by Jeff in CA | December 8, 2007 1:28 AM

Vote Green.

Posted by SocraticGadfly | December 8, 2007 2:39 AM

The leaking of this info now is Bush's revenge for the Iran assessment. That's how this administration works. Bush and his puppeteers have condoned whatever was on those tapes and worse. I don't doubt they condoned the tapes destruction, but Rove knows to do it in a way that can't be traced back, then save it in the anti-CIA armamentarium in case it's needed for future use. I'm sure he has worse skeletons to pull from the closet if the CIA doesn't get back to toeing the administration line - expect some new and more scary news about Iran from the CIA soon...

Posted by Brad | December 8, 2007 10:58 AM

I would love to see some other chairman of the Intelligence Committee than Jay Rockefeller. However, the number two ranking Democrat on this committee is Dianne Feinstein, who be probably be even worse.

Posted by Vadranor | December 8, 2007 12:51 PM

To clarify the record a little, Jane Harman is no longer a member of the House Intelligence Committee. She left the committee after Nancy Pelosi replaced her as Chair with Silvestre Reyes following the November, 2006 election. As I noted here in the subsequent post 'More Snitch,' there is, however, a new opening on that Intelligence Committee as a result of this week's sudden resignation of Democrat Alcee Hastings. What is desperately needed now is a new committee member of the caliber of John Tierney or Rush Holt - who are about halfway up the seniority stack on that committee, which is very unfortunately larded with silent, ineffective, and almost certainly technology-ignorant Democrats at the top.

To emphasize that point about the senior Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, there's a stunning turn of events reported by Ken Silverstein today, about the close relationship between Silvestre Reyes and the torture-tape-destroyer Jose Rodriquez Jr., himself, recently retired from the CIA:

Meanwhile, Rodriguez, two sources have told me, is doing business in Texas with the brother of Silvestre Reyes, the Democratic chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where Reyes has served since 2001. From what I understand, Rodriguez and Chairman Reyes are extremely close friends, and the congressman “set up Rodriguez with his brother.”

[snip]

Last August 16, shortly before he retired, Rodriguez was honored by Reyes at a border security conference in El Paso. “I consider him an American hero,” Reyes said before presenting Rodriguez with a flag flown over the Capitol to honor his service at the CIA. (Reyes also said that Rodriguez’s real-life exploits inspired “24,” which based on recent revelations is an interesting observation.)

http://harpers.org/archive/2007/12/hbc-90001879

I'd just add that this August, 2007 affair in El Paso honoring Rodriguez was evidently the event that brought DNI Mike McConnell to Texas, where, in the company of House Intelligence Committee Chairman Reyes, McConnell gave his effusive, and widely-read, interview to the El Paso Times, shortly after the passage of the "Protect America Act."

As for Jay Rockefeller - there is one absolute imperative for such a vital (and secretive) committee as his, that he has deliberately chosen to overlook and dismiss: providing for the full and equal participation of each and every committee member in their (closed-door) deliberations, and in their drafting of bills such as that committee's (atrocious) new FISA Amendments Act. That Act, as Russ Feingold made clear in the open Judiciary Committee mark-up, was the product of a secret process conducted by Rockefeller and Kit Bond, that shut the rest of the Intelligence Committee members out until the 'deal was done' and set in "bipartisan" stone - which was a gross distortion and suppression of democratic process on an extremely vital issue for our democracy. No one on that committee should stand for that sort of corrupted, undemocratic process with so much on the line, and with so little of that committee's work public to begin with.

Posted by pow wow | December 8, 2007 8:58 PM

Well, you know, Matt, if Rockfeller WAS ready for prime time, he wouldn't get reelected in West Virginia. In every previous campaign in which he's shown any backbone whatsoever, he's either lost (1972) or come close to being upset (1984). Like Clinton and Al Gore, he realized long ago that he was living in a Southern (i.e., barbarian) state.

Posted by Bruce Moomaw

Well, Bruce, Bob Byrd, who has been elected and re-elected since 1958, has of late proven much more civil-libertarian than Rockefeller. Check it out.

Posted by Henderstock | December 8, 2007 11:22 PM

Just to comment on a point. I don't think the tape destruction was revenge for the Iran assessment, because the Iran assessment was likely deliberately released by Bush to counter the expect ElBaradei report due in a couple weeks that is likely to clear - or substantially clear - Iran of having a nuclear weapons program. Scott Ritter brought this likely explanation to my attention.

So they released this crap NIE that claims Iran HAD a program, but stopped it - allowing them - and Israel, which already has - to claim that Iran has or will RESTART it - or the even murkier claim that just allowing Iran to enrich uranium is the equivalent (which, technically, as a dual capability, it is - IF your centrifuges can enrich to weapons grade, which Iran's can't.)

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | December 9, 2007 2:49 AM