Anonymous wrote:I'll do you one better. I'll create a thread. But it'll probably get deleted.


Obama DOJ Forced FBI To Delete 500,000 Fugitives From Background Check Database

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department under Barack Obama directed the FBI to drop more than 500,000 names of fugitives with outstanding arrest warrants from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, acting FBI deputy director David Bowdich testified Wednesday.

Fugitives from justice are barred from buying a firearm under federal law. But what is a fugitive from justice? That definition has been under debate by the FBI and the ATF.

According to The Washington Post, the FBI considered any person with an outstanding arrest warrant to be a fugitive. On the other hand, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives defined a fugitive as someone who has an outstanding arrest warrant and has crossed state lines.

That disagreement was settled at the end of Obama’s second term, when the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel sided with the ATF’s interpretation. Under President Donald Trump, the DOJ defined a fugitive as a person who went to another state to dodge criminal prosecution or evade giving testimony in criminal court, and implemented the Office of Legal Counsel’s decision. The decision meant that around half a million fugitives were removed from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

More:

http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/15/doj-fbi-fugitives-background-check-database/

So, you seem to have given this example as a kind of argument defending Haspel's order to destroy videotapes of torture (which is a crime). Your argument seems to be -- Haspel ordered something to be deleted but so did the Obama Administration, therefore what she did isn't wrong. Putting aside that, as a matter of logic, the conclusion that Haspel didn't commit a crime doesn't follow.... Your example is inapposite. The torture tapes Haspel ordered were (arguably, at a minimum) evidence of a crime. What the Obama Administration did was interpret who was a fugitive in order to determine whether the fugitive's name should or should not be included in a database. This does not affect any evidence of the underlying crime committed by the fugitive.

Or maybe your argument is the Obama Administration used the administrative definition/regulation process to keep something from the public eye, therefore it is OK that the Bush Administration used the administrative definition/regulation process to keep something from the public eye? Well, that is a more apt comparison. The Bush Administration did indeed, thru the Bybee and You memos, try to redefine what they called "enhanced interrogation" as something that was not "torture". Unfortunately, your comparison falls apart. The people who engaged in torture now defend their actions as "following orders" and "legal" even though the memos were subsequently withdrawn and Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act (2005) to reaffirm existing anti-torture statutes. By contrast, including or not including someone in a criminal database is not a criminal act.

Sadly, but predictably, people who followed orders ARE now subject to serious criminal penalties if the Executive Branch ever decides to prosecute, plus they are subject to prosecution and suit in other countries (like as is being requested in Germany).

I will explain in a response to your other post why your assertion that no crime was committed is false.

I don't care that torture was legal at the time. To a decent person, torture should be inherently wrong, and the fact that laws permit it should not compel him/her to engage in it.

What if rape was legal? What if CIA came up with a different name for it, like "Enhanced Intimate Naked Interrogation Technique"? Would it make it OK?

The kicker is that as I understand, waterboarding did not produce any useful intelligence at that time. Essentially, CIA tortured them for nothing. That should feel awesome.

Anonymous wrote:What was illegal about destroying those tapes?

18 USC 1519 - Destruction of Evidence

It's a federal crime to destroy or tamper with evidence. Those tapes were evidence of a crime. Torture is illegal under US law - 18 USC 2340. The US also signed and ratified the UN Convertion against Torture. And the US Constitution's 8th Amendment prohibts "cruel and unusual punishment".

BTW, 18 USC 2340 (Torture) subjects perpetrators to a fine and/or up to 20 years in prison, except where the victim died as a result of torture, in which case, the perpetrator may be subject to life in prison or a death sentence. One can also be charged for conspiracy under this statute, thus sweeping many more CIA and other administration officials into potentially being charged.

And the Torture Victim Prevention Act allows victims to sue perpetrators in US court, potentially exposing people like Gina Haspel to financial ruin in addition to long jail terms.

So, you can now understand why they destroyed the evidence....

Anonymous wrote:Rand Paul already said he wouldn’t be voting for her. I doubt McCain will either. She faces a tough fight.

So we get Cotton then. Careful what you with for folks.....

I am ready to watch the left devour a woman in the confirmation hearings.

Afterwards, we can put in a real tough guy. Just stick with the plan!

Anonymous wrote:What was illegal about destroying those tapes?

I don't think you understand. The selfless patriots here at DCUM view those who captured, beat down, and killed terrorists as the bad guys. They would love to see these bad boys pay for their war crimes. What a strange world they live in!

What was illegal about destroying those tapes?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought Trump didn’t like to hire women in positions of power???

She's okay because she favors torture.

You think the head of the Russia's SVR, Iran's MOIS, or China's MSS are nice guys?

I kinda want the head of the CIA to be an asshole. Good appointment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, you didn't get the memo.


Correction: Trump’s Pick to Head CIA Did Not Oversee Waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah
ProPublica erred when it reported in 2017 that Gina Haspel was in charge of a secret prison in Thailand during the infamous interrogation of an al-Qaida suspect.

by Raymond Bonner, special to ProPublica March 15, 6:38 p.m. EDT

On Feb. 22, 2017, ProPublica published a story that inaccurately described Gina Haspel’s role in the treatment of Abu Zubaydah, a suspected al-Qaida leader who was imprisoned by the CIA at a secret “black site” in Thailand in 2002.

The story said that Haspel, a career CIA officer who President Trump has nominated to be the next director of central intelligence, oversaw the clandestine base where Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods that are widely seen as torture. The story also said she mocked the prisoner’s suffering in a private conversation. Neither of these assertions is correct and we retract them. It is now clear that Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.

Our account of Haspel’s actions was drawn in part from declassified agency cables and CIA-reviewed books which referred to the official overseeing Zubaydah’s interrogation at a secret prison in Thailand as “chief of base.” The books and cables redacted the name of the official, as is routinely done in declassified documents referring to covert operations.

More:

https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture

Yeah, I love ProPublica and they do good work but this is a serious f*ckup. No way she gets a fair hearing unless the whole report is declassified, which may not be such a bad thing anyway.

OK, but she still was in charge when another prisoner was waterboarded 3 times and she participated in ordering the destruction of 92 interrogation tapes, which makes her complicit in the cover up of torture. she is still unsuitable for this position. I don't care that she had a stellar 30 year career; she tarnished it when she participated in torture.

Don't you people understand the message Trump is sending with this pick? Untill now his approach has been to fire or encourage civil servants to leave. Now the message is to those who have managed to stay - don't worry if you are asked to do something unethical or against the law or democratic norms, cooperation is the way to advnce your career.

How do you figure? What was illegal about destroying those tapes?

Rand Paul already said he wouldn’t be voting for her. I doubt McCain will either. She faces a tough fight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, you didn't get the memo.


Correction: Trump’s Pick to Head CIA Did Not Oversee Waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah
ProPublica erred when it reported in 2017 that Gina Haspel was in charge of a secret prison in Thailand during the infamous interrogation of an al-Qaida suspect.

by Raymond Bonner, special to ProPublica March 15, 6:38 p.m. EDT

On Feb. 22, 2017, ProPublica published a story that inaccurately described Gina Haspel’s role in the treatment of Abu Zubaydah, a suspected al-Qaida leader who was imprisoned by the CIA at a secret “black site” in Thailand in 2002.

The story said that Haspel, a career CIA officer who President Trump has nominated to be the next director of central intelligence, oversaw the clandestine base where Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods that are widely seen as torture. The story also said she mocked the prisoner’s suffering in a private conversation. Neither of these assertions is correct and we retract them. It is now clear that Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.

Our account of Haspel’s actions was drawn in part from declassified agency cables and CIA-reviewed books which referred to the official overseeing Zubaydah’s interrogation at a secret prison in Thailand as “chief of base.” The books and cables redacted the name of the official, as is routinely done in declassified documents referring to covert operations.

More:

https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture

Yeah, I love ProPublica and they do good work but this is a serious f*ckup. No way she gets a fair hearing unless the whole report is declassified, which may not be such a bad thing anyway.

OK, but she still was in charge when another prisoner was waterboarded 3 times and she participated in ordering the destruction of 92 interrogation tapes, which makes her complicit in the cover up of torture. she is still unsuitable for this position. I don't care that she had a stellar 30 year career; she tarnished it when she participated in torture.

Don't you people understand the message Trump is sending with this pick? Untill now his approach has been to fire or encourage civil servants to leave. Now the message is to those who have managed to stay - don't worry if you are asked to do something unethical or against the law or democratic norms, cooperation is the way to advnce your career.

What this tells me is a news organization made some ASSumptions.

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, you didn't get the memo.


Correction: Trump’s Pick to Head CIA Did Not Oversee Waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah
ProPublica erred when it reported in 2017 that Gina Haspel was in charge of a secret prison in Thailand during the infamous interrogation of an al-Qaida suspect.

by Raymond Bonner, special to ProPublica March 15, 6:38 p.m. EDT

On Feb. 22, 2017, ProPublica published a story that inaccurately described Gina Haspel’s role in the treatment of Abu Zubaydah, a suspected al-Qaida leader who was imprisoned by the CIA at a secret “black site” in Thailand in 2002.

The story said that Haspel, a career CIA officer who President Trump has nominated to be the next director of central intelligence, oversaw the clandestine base where Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods that are widely seen as torture. The story also said she mocked the prisoner’s suffering in a private conversation. Neither of these assertions is correct and we retract them. It is now clear that Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.

Our account of Haspel’s actions was drawn in part from declassified agency cables and CIA-reviewed books which referred to the official overseeing Zubaydah’s interrogation at a secret prison in Thailand as “chief of base.” The books and cables redacted the name of the official, as is routinely done in declassified documents referring to covert operations.

More:

https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture

Yeah, I love ProPublica and they do good work but this is a serious f*ckup. No way she gets a fair hearing unless the whole report is declassified, which may not be such a bad thing anyway.

Apparently, you didn't get the memo.


Correction: Trump’s Pick to Head CIA Did Not Oversee Waterboarding of Abu Zubaydah
ProPublica erred when it reported in 2017 that Gina Haspel was in charge of a secret prison in Thailand during the infamous interrogation of an al-Qaida suspect.

by Raymond Bonner, special to ProPublica March 15, 6:38 p.m. EDT

On Feb. 22, 2017, ProPublica published a story that inaccurately described Gina Haspel’s role in the treatment of Abu Zubaydah, a suspected al-Qaida leader who was imprisoned by the CIA at a secret “black site” in Thailand in 2002.

The story said that Haspel, a career CIA officer who President Trump has nominated to be the next director of central intelligence, oversaw the clandestine base where Zubaydah was subjected to waterboarding and other coercive interrogation methods that are widely seen as torture. The story also said she mocked the prisoner’s suffering in a private conversation. Neither of these assertions is correct and we retract them. It is now clear that Haspel did not take charge of the base until after the interrogation of Zubaydah ended.

Our account of Haspel’s actions was drawn in part from declassified agency cables and CIA-reviewed books which referred to the official overseeing Zubaydah’s interrogation at a secret prison in Thailand as “chief of base.” The books and cables redacted the name of the official, as is routinely done in declassified documents referring to covert operations.

More:

https://www.propublica.org/article/cia-cables-detail-its-new-deputy-directors-role-in-torture