Wise Law Blog: Political Scandal

Monday, March 03, 2008

Sunday, December 09, 2007

The CIA Torture Tapes

Yet another, potentially devastating scandal broke in Washington this week.

On Thursday, the New York Times reported that in 2005, the CIA destroyed at least two videotapes of interrogations by American agents of purportedly major, Al Quaida operatives, during which so-called "enhanced techniques," including waterboarding were utilized.

Counterterrorism expert Larry Johnson commented on General Michael Hayden's "official" explanation that the tapes were destroyed as a security measure to ensure that the interrogators would never be exposed to potential retaliation by Al Quaida:

The Hayden excuse does not pass the bullshit test.
...Let’s be clear why these were destroyed–the chief of the Operations Division, Jose Rodriguez, understood that this was video evidence of torture. It was not the exposure of clandestine identities that had him fretting. It was the fear that CIA officers and contractors could be standing before a tribunal in the Hague trying to explain why the images of torture were not torture.

President Bush claims to have "no recollection of being made aware of the tapes or their existence" before they were destroyed.

The Washington Post reports that Justice Department investigations into the destruction of the tapes are already underway:

The Justice Department and the CIA announced yesterday that they have started a preliminary inquiry into the CIA's 2005 destruction of videotapes that depicted harsh interrogation of two terrorism suspects.
The announcement follows congressional demands Friday for an investigation into the CIA's action despite warnings from the White House and congressional leaders to preserve the tapes.

Conservative writer Andrew Sullivan responds today with strong words in his article, What The Tapes Would Have Shown:

These tapes could have brought all this home to the American public and the world, revealing the president to be an active proponent of torture, even of a mentally ill man who provided nothing of any worth. They were and are critical to proving - in way that could not be denied or buried - that we have a war criminal in the Oval Office. That is surely the simplest and most obvious reason they were destroyed. And it's the most plausible reason that on a matter in which he was very personally involved, a matter where he risked being exposed as a war criminal, the president "has no recollection" of being informed about the tapes' destruction.
I've long argued that the simple facts of the detention and interrogation program leave no doubt in my mind that war crimes have occurred. I've also believed that at some point, the guilty men would be exposed and brought to justice. That may be about to happen. And it is the Congress's and the Attorney Genera's vital responsibility to see that justice is served, whomever it applies to.

For more on the destruction of the CIA torture videotapes see:

Justice, CIA Begin Videotape Inquiry - Washington Post
What The Tapes Would Have Shown - Andrew Sullivan
Bush: 'No recollection' of CIA tapes - CNN
CIA ignored warnings about interrogation videos - TPM
‘Well-Informed’ Source Tells CBS That Tapes Were Destroyed To Prevent Prosecution - Think Progress
Destruction of CIA Tapes Could Threaten Prosecutions - Talk Left
Capitol Hill Dems Push for CIA Tape Inquiry - Truthdig
White House told CIA not to destroy tapes - Raw Story
Dems Seek Probe re CIA Tapes; Destruction a Plus for Suspects’ Defense? - ABA Journal
Obstruction of Justice? - TPM
The Torture Advocate Behind The CIA Tape Destruction - Andrew Sullivan
C.I.A. Destroyed 2 Tapes Showing Interrogations - New York Times

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

Bush Misled Press on Plame: Scott McClellan

What Happened, a new book by Scott McClellan, the former White House Press Secretary, provides a revealing glimpse of deception and manipulation of the press by the Bush White House.

Raw Story's Former WH Press Sec.: Bush, Rove helped pass along 'false information' on Plame provides the details:

President Bush, Karl Rove, and other top administration officials were "involved" in misleading the White House press corps about the outing of ex-CIA agent Valerie Plame, a forthcoming book from former Press Secretary Scott McClellan alleges.
Entitled What Happened, the new tell-all features McClellan's account of his days as the White House's top spokesman -- including a behind-the-scenes look at the Bush administration's handling of the Plame affair, according to a tantalizing excerpt from the book released on its publisher's website.
"The most powerful leader in the world had called upon me to speak on his behalf and help restore credibility he lost amid the failure to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," writes McClellan. "So I stood at the White house briefing room podium in front of the glare of the klieg lights for the better part of two weeks and publicly exonerated two of the senior-most aides in the White House: Karl Rove and Scooter Libby."
But his press performances weren't based on the facts, McClellan continues.
"There was one problem. It was not true," he writes. "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the president himself."

....

In related news, has Karl Rove cut and run from George Bush? Some commentators think so.

- Garry J. Wise, Toronto

Visit our Toronto Law Firm website: www.wiselaw.net

EMPLOYMENT LAW • CIVIL LITIGATION • WILLS AND ESTATES • FAMILY LAW & DIVORCE

Punitive Damages in Ontario Employment Law - Pate Estate v. Galway-Cavendish and Harvey (Township)

American courtroom dramas and John Grisham novels tend to skew Canadian views on what punitive damages are and how they are awarded.

The Ontario Court of Appeal’s November 2013 decision in

Pate Estate v. Galway-Cavendish and Harvey (Township) provides some clarity on the awarding of punitive damages in the employment law context.
Read More...

Money Mart Ordered to Pay $30K for Harassment

The Ontario Human Rights Tribunal has ordered National Money Mart Company to pay $30,000 in compensation to a former, one-year employee of the company who had been subjected to ongoing, serious sexual harassment by her workplace supervisor.