National security served by ‘legally suspect policies’

The investigation into the administration’s interrogation policies and legal justifications continued before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. Chairman Jerrold Nadler was concerned that America’s national security and values have not been well served by ‘legally suspect policies.’

Witness Daniel Levin, former acting assistant attorney general to the Office of Legal Counsel, said that over time legal analysis regarding interrogation replaced policy analysis. He said many steps that the administration was taking, albeit legal, had costs which outweighed the benefits. Levin felt that some policies should have been adjusted. Levin also accepted full responsibility for any legal advice he gave and felt he should be held accountable if that advice turned out to be mistaken.

Witness Retired Colonel Lawrence B. Wilkerson said he knew how soldiers could ‘go astray in the heat of battle’ and he felt that leadership at the highest levels had fail in this instance. When questioned by Representative John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) as to whether interrogation tactics were pushed from the top down, Wilkerson affirmed that it was his view.

Nadler also announced that one of the expected witnesses, Douglas Feith of Goodwin Procter LLP, had pulled out of attending the hearing at the last minute due to his unwillingness to be near one of the other witnesses present who was unnamed. Nadler deemed Feith’s actions ‘a fundamental disrespect for Congress and the American people.’He gave the assurance that Feith would be called before the Subcommittee to testify before too much time had elapsed.