Tortured appointments

The Trump administration has been a revolving door like no other in recent memory. Dozens of people serving the president have resigned, been fired, or otherwise left. Some lasted only days.

Many positions simply remain unfilled, including key diplomatic posts. But, while the administration has made a number of questionable appointments, including people with histories of corruption, incompetence, or serious conflicts of interests, two recent nominees raise particular concern.

John Bolton is the president’s new, and third, National Security Advisor, a position that does not require Senate confirmation. This is probably good for Bolton as he might not make it through a confirmation battle. He couldn’t do so during the Bush administration when he was nominated to be the ambassador to the United Nations. Bush made a recess appointment of Bolton in 2005, but senators of both major parties raised serious concerns about his history and actions while in the role. It soon became clear that he had little chance of winning confirmation.

Bolton is likely a logical choice for Trump as, like the president, he is both nationalist and highly abrasive. Regarding his tenure at the UN, The Economist magazine called him the most controversial person ever to hold the post. He was accused, while at the State Department, of skewing intelligence and withholding information from his superiors, including Secretaries of State Powell and Rice. He appears to have lied on forms required by the Senate for confirmation. Of course, this is rather common for Trump appointees, so it is hardly news.

Of greater concern is Bolton’s foreign policy views. The term “hawk” doesn’t do him justice. Not only did he support the disastrous invasion of Iraq, he is one of the few who still thinks the war was a good idea.

Bolton sees war as a first option with diplomacy to be disregarded. He has called for the overthrow of governments in Iran, North Korea, Syria, and Libya. Perhaps it seems quaint, but I’ll point out that such actions would be highly illegal.

Equally concerning is another Bush administration retread, Gina Haspel. After ousting his Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, who he had undermined at every opportunity, Trump nominated CIA Director Mike Pompeo to the post at State and Haspel to replace Pompeo at the CIA.

In 2002, Haspel was the chief of base of a CIA black site located in Thailand. In case you are not familiar with the concept, the CIA had a rendition program in which they kidnapped people anywhere in the world and sent them to secret facilities to be tortured. Haspel ran one of these facilities and oversaw the torture program, which included waterboarding and sleep deprivation.

These programs were illegal then and are now, under both US and international law.

A 2012 Senate Intelligence Committee report heavily redacted for declassification, totals 525 pages of what is publicly known about the rendition and torture program. The full, classified report, amounts to over 6,000 pages.

There is far more that is hidden from public scrutiny than is known. Haspel is part of the reason for that as she was involved in the destruction of evidence of the program, including videotapes depicting interrogation techniques used.

It is also useful to remind people of the CIA’S response to that Senate report. They hacked into the computers of committee members, infiltrating the network of the US Senate.

How much public accountability can we have when an agency is permitted to spy on the Senate committee that is supposed to oversee its activities with little consequence?

Senate confirmation could be a tough battle as there may be opposition from members of both parties. Senator Rand Paul (R., KY) has already voiced his opposition, calling Haspel “the head cheerleader for waterboarding” and stating that her running of the torture program and destruction of evidence “should preclude her from ever running the CIA.”

The Obama administration made public some of the information about the Bush-era torture programs, but remained opposed to any real accountability, deeming it politically unwise. One would hope that the Senate confirmation hearings will provide another opportunity for scrutiny.

Lastly, a correction, and an important one. In my March 28 column, my 400th overall, I included a factual error. I stated that Tulare County had voted for President Trump by a substantial margin and that the margin was likely greater here in Porterville.

In fact, that last part was not true. Almost every precinct in Porterville voted for Clinton. For evidence, you can look at your, or any, precinct on an interactive map hosted by the LA Times.

So much for our local stereotypes.