A Sudden Concern About the Economy

Bush and other White House aides have repeatedly refused to comment while the matter is under investigation. But reporters should not, through their silence, endorse the position that the president of the United States is not answerable for what his staff has done in his name, as long as someone else is looking into it.

Indeed, the burden should be on the White House to prove in the court of public opinion that Cheney and Addington and other White House staffers weren't accessories to what may well have been criminal conduct. And, until the White House meets that burden, the press should demand answers.

Harman's Letter

Walter Pincus writes in The Washington Post: "A key member of Congress disclosed yesterday that the CIA said in February 2003 that it planned to destroy videotapes of harsh interrogations after the agency's inspector general finished probing the episodes, an account that adds detail to recent CIA statements about the circumstances surrounding the tapes' destruction.

"Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) released a declassified copy of a letter she secretly wrote to the CIA in February 2003, in which she quoted then-CIA General Counsel Scott W. Muller as telling her a tape of the agency's interrogation of Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Hussein, better known as Abu Zubaida, 'will be destroyed after the Inspector General finishes his inquiry.' The CIA yesterday confirmed Harman's account of Muller's statement.

"Harman at that time had recently become the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, and in her letter she urged Muller to 'reconsider' that plan and predicted that the tapes' destruction 'would reflect badly on the agency.' Agency officials nonetheless destroyed the tapes in 2005, and on Wednesday, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey ordered a formal criminal probe into the destruction."

Here is Harman's press release, including a statement from her office, her letter and Muller's letter back.

Harman writes in her statement: "Clearly, White House officials were involved in discussions regarding the disposition of the tapes and Congress needs to know why key Committees may have been misled about their existence and not told they had been destroyed."

Harman's letter to Muller, however, while noting her concerns about the tapes, was actually mostly about her concerns over the overall conduct of CIA interrogators.

She wrote: "At the briefing you assured us that the [redacted] approved by the Attorney General have been subject to an extensive review by lawyers at the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Justice and the National Security Council and found to be within the law.

"It is also the case, however, that what was described raises profound policy questions and I am concerned about whether these have been as rigorously examined as the legal questions. I would like to know what kind of policy review took place and what questions were examined. In particular, I would like to know whether the most senior levels of the White House have determined that these practices are consistent with the principles and policies of the United States. Have enhanced techniques been authorized and approved by the President?"

Muller responded with an imperious brush-off: "As we informed both you and the leadership of the Intelligence Committees last September, a number of Executive Branch lawyers including lawyers from the Department of Justice participated in the determination that, in the appropriate circumstances, use of these techniques is fully consistent with US law. While I do not think it appropriate for me to comment on issues that are a matter of policy, much less the nature and extent of Executive Branch policy deliberations, I think it would be fair to assume that policy as well as legal matters have been addressed within the Executive Branch."

As maddening as Muller's response was, however, Harman seemed to accept it.