Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Another Dem casts doubt on CIA briefing memo

Politico

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:

Aide Email to Politico:

*****

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.

No comments: