[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 83 (Monday, May 21, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2788-S2789]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      CONFIRMATION OF GINA HASPEL

  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I would like to discuss my decision to vote 
against the President's nomination of Gina Haspel to be the next 
Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, CIA.
  First, let me state that I have immense respect for the men and women 
of the CIA. I have had the opportunity to meet many of them and to 
personally offer my thanks in some of the world's most dangerous 
locations. Their work is difficult and demanding but critical to 
helping safeguard our nation.
  I do not question Ms. Haspel's patriotism, intellect, or dedication 
to the CIA. She has ably served the agency and several Administrations, 
both Democratic and Republican. Ms. Haspel is clearly a committed 
professional.
  I welcome Ms. Haspel's statement of support for the ``stricter moral 
standard'' legislatively imposed by Congress with respect to 
interrogation policies and her admission that, in hindsight, the use of 
coercive interrogation techniques was a mistake. However, I remain 
troubled that Ms. Haspel failed to clearly articulate a view that the 
use of coercive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, was 
immoral.
  As discussed in a 2008 report by the Senate Armed Services Committee, 
the CIA's so-called enhanced interrogation techniques were based on 
Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape, or SERE, techniques used to 
train members of our military to resist torture. There are those who 
defend the use of such techniques by the CIA because similar techniques 
were previously used on our own troops during training activities. 
However, this argument ignores the fact that coercive interrogation 
techniques were never intended to be used by U.S. interrogators to gain 
actionable intelligence. Rather, the SERE techniques, which are based 
on Communist Chinese interrogation methods used during the Korean War 
to elicit false confessions, were developed to expose U.S. soldiers to 
the abusive treatment they might be subjected to if captured by our 
enemies.
  There is simply no comparison between the use of such SERE techniques 
in a controlled environment to train U.S. military personnel to resist 
torture by an immoral enemy and their use by the CIA to interrogate 
detainees after 9/11. There is also no basis for any assertion that 
they are an effective means to gather intelligence, given their 
original purpose.
  Some have suggested that Ms. Haspel is being held to a higher 
standard than that of former Director Brennan, who similarly served in 
leadership positions at the CIA at the same time as the creation and 
operation of the detention and interrogation program. During his 
confirmation process, former Director Brennan stated that he was aware 
of the program during his time at the CIA, but ``did not play a role in 
its creation, execution, or oversight.'' He also testified, under oath, 
that he raised significant concerns and ``personal objections'' to 
colleagues at the time and stated that waterboarding is 
``reprehensible'' and inconsistent with American values.
  Unfortunately, the same can't be said for Ms. Haspel. There is a lot 
the public doesn't know about Ms. Haspel due to the CIA's selective 
declassification of her record, but we do know that she joined the 
CIA's Counterterrorism Center soon after 9/11 and held various 
leadership positions in the Directorate of Operations that oversaw the 
detention and interrogation program. We also know that Ms. Haspel 
continues to be unwilling to make statements similar to those of former 
Director Brennan condemning the use of torture.
  Lastly, we know that Ms. Haspel supported the destruction of 
evidence, namely 92 videotapes documenting waterboarding and other 
coercive interrogation techniques by CIA officers and contractors, 
despite known objections from superiors at the CIA and the White House. 
That alone should cause serious, bipartisan concern. Ms. Haspel's claim 
that she was just following orders is deeply flawed. It may be true 
that there was no legal prohibition on the destruction of the 
interrogation tapes, but that does not mean it was moral and ethical, 
particularly in light of known objections from various senior 
stakeholders.
  At the hearing, I asked Ms. Haspel if she believed the destruction of 
the tapes was insubordinate, and she declined to describe it as such. 
Her refusal to clearly acknowledge and repudiate that error, even in 
retrospect, sets a troubling precedent that could be cited by other CIA 
officials to justify their own questionable behavior in the future, 
including those under her supervision.
  Never has it been so important to have a Director of the CIA that is 
willing and capable of speaking truth to power. Ms. Haspel was 
nominated to lead the CIA by a President prone to misinformation and 
who, repeatedly, has advocated for the use of U.S. power and 
capabilities in ways that are inconsistent with U.S. values, including 
killing the families of terrorists.
  I am glad that Ms. Haspel has committed not to restart a detention 
and

[[Page S2789]]

interrogation program under her leadership, but I retain serious doubts 
that she would stand up to President Trump if he directed her to carry 
out another legal, but morally questionable activity in the future. 
Taken together, Ms. Haspel's lack of transparency, unwillingness to 
repudiate torture, and inability to learn from past mistakes do not 
give me confidence that she is the right person to lead the CIA. I, 
therefore, voted no on her nomination.

                          ____________________