Pelosi’s Stealth Move to Criminalize the CIA

On February 24th, congressional Democrats, led by Chairman of the Intelligence Committee Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA), attempted to quietly insert a provision into the intelligence appropriations bill which would have allowed for the criminal prosecution of CIA officers.   FrumForum spoke with former CIA officials, all of whom agreed that the proposed language had it been adopted would have handicapped the CIA’s efforts to fight terror and warned against future Democratic attempts to reintroduce the language without debate.

The Democratic amendment would have imposed criminal sentences on CIA officers if they committed acts of “cruel, inhuman, or degrading behavior.”  This would have covered actions depriving a captured terrorist of “necessary” food, water, and sleep; violating their religious beliefs, exploiting any phobias they might have, and “threatening” any force.  Furthermore, the provision was inserted without any hearings, debate, discussion, or review.  Instead, the Democrats used a parliamentary maneuver to insert the language, burying the provision into the manager’s amendment instead of bringing it forward as its own amendment.

According to Representative Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), the manager’s amendment is not supposed to be controversial and is mainly for technical issues. It was not until after the first twenty pages that the McDermott Amendment was inserted in these benign reports.  Hoekstra noted that this is “the safest place for an amendment to become part of a bill.” Due in large part to Hoekstra, the provision was taken out of the bill, although he is concerned that the Democrats will try once again to make this provision a law. He commented that the Democratic leadership just does not get it; “we are not fighting the CIA; we are fighting the terrorists.”

Furthermore, Hoekstra has also put forward a motion asking the CIA Inspector General to conduct an independent review of whether any members of Congress objected to the use of enhanced interrogation techniques when they were informed, to review the steps that were subsequently taken, and to require the release of interrogation briefing memos.  The congressman told FrumForum that the Democratic congressional leadership is “willing to throw the CIA under the bus, but they are not willing to release documents that showed they knew about the harsh interrogation.” Once again, since the motion to release the documents was defeated, it is obvious the Democrats will talk about transparency but are not willing to let the American public debate the choices they have made.

A former operative stated that through this provision congressional Democrats would have “hamstrung the CIA, affected morale at the agency, emboldened the terrorists, and affected America’s relationship with foreign liaison services.  If they are trying to hurt the war on terror, they are succeeding.  Remember who we are talking about: terrorists.”  Former senior officials expressed the opinion that these Democrats were putting their own partisan agenda ahead of America’s safety, and that this is beyond normal D.C. politics. However, Chairman Reyes has dismissed criticism on the floor of the House as nothing more than politics.

John Yoo, author of the Department of Justice interrogation memos and the book, Crisis and Command, agreed that the language would have limited the CIA’s effectiveness. He further noted that another consequence would be having those in the agency become risk adverse.  Yoo has first hand knowledge of how a bogus investigation can ruin one’s life and reputation, sadly stating: “no one wants to be the subject of an investigation, even if at the end you are cleared of the charges.”

Americans need to understand that the war on terror is an intelligence war. Former CIA Director Hayden passionately stated “whatever success we’ve enjoyed has been a product of America’s intelligence services working with the military and other partners to take the fight to al Qaeda wherever they may be.  We have killed or captured a significant portion of the al Qaeda leadership, and the leadership that remains spends a significant portion of their time trying to ensure their own survival.  To accomplish this, our officers have had to be tough, talented, tenacious — and brave.  And even when they are now being accused of having done too much to defend America, these officers continue to go into harm’s way to keep America safe.”

What the Democratic congressional leaders should be doing is letting the men and women of the CIA know that Congress supports their actions.  A former CIA official pointed out that any captured terrorist could claim torture and immediately request a court hearing limiting the amount of actionable intelligence gained. He further noted that the Democrats intentionally made this provision vague and undefined to subject intelligence agents to criminal sanctions. “Being used as a political prop has to be demoralizing to the CIA, especially given recent threat reporting,” Hayden succinctly said.

These former officials want to convey a message to these congressional Democrats: A former high ranking official angrily wanted Congress to know that “the CIA was the shield for the U.S. in the first three years after 9/11,” something they seem to be forgetting.