has also increased due to a campaign of mistaken statements and press articles launched against the report before anyone has had the chance to read it. as a matter of fact, the report is just now, as i speak, being released. this is what it looks like. i senator chambliss asked me if we could have the minority report bound with the majority report for this draft that is not possible, but in the final draft it will be bound together. but this is what the summary of the 6,000 pages look like. my words give me no pleasure. i m releasing this report because i know there are thousands of employees at the cia who do not condone what i will spook about this morning speak about this morning and who workday and night, long hours within the law for america s
2001 to january of 2009. the report does not include considerable detail on the cia s interactions with the white house. excuse me, it does include considerable detail on the cia s interactions with the white house, the departments of justice, state, defense and the senate intelligence committee. the review is based on contemporaneous records and documents during the time the program was in place and active. now, these documents are important because they aren t based on recollection. they aren t based on revision, and they aren t a rationalization a decade later. it s these documents referenced repeatedly in thousands of footnotes that provide the factual basis for the study s conclusions.
report produced by congress in the time i ve worked in national security. this was a precooked report, and the reason they didn t talk to people like hayden and jose rodriguez and other former cia officials is because they did not want this precooked report to be spoiled by inconvenient facts. jon: well, you know, talking about the facts, i have not read the report yet, i am just reading some of what s coming out about it because it s only just now being released since we have taken air with this program. but, for instance, one of the conclusions of the report is that there were a number of other suspects that were subjected to waterboarding, more than the cia had earlier reported. why, why would that, why would that information just be coming out now? why was the cia why would the cia not admitted to that earlier? this report was based entirely on a document search. we had to talk to officials who were responsible for these documents. there could be errors in the
the white house now seems okay with the disclosure. what do you make of it? well, there are two things. one is, okay, one thing to actually investigate and do the report. there s another issue is why make the report public? why make the report prick now? public now? there should be one major rule in foreign policy like in medicine, first do no harm. by releasing this report now three thicks are going to happen things are going to happen. one, it gives excuse for a revenge attack on americans. secondly, foreign intelligence agencies look at this and say we can t trust america to keep secrets, we re not going to cooperate with america. we re not going to share our intelligence. and then finally, what it does is tells everybody who works in the american intelligence community, watch out. you may do something that you think is justified and legal, but ten years later you could be investigated for this, you could be called out, you could be put in danger. so i look at all of that and
bin laden, they have all said they got a lot of intelligence from this. so it was legal, it was effective, why go after it now? unless the motivation s completely political. congress is changing hands, the senate is going from democrat to republican hands, and are the democrats in the senate just they ve been evicted from the house, are they just trashing the place before they leave? shannon: well, they re certainly getting the information out there over plenty of objections. kt, thank you for your expertise. thanks, shannon. jon: so that is the report coming out led by democratic senator dianne feinstein of california. again, that report includes concludes that the former directors of the cia, george tenet, porter goss, michael hayden repeatedly inflated the value of the enhanced interrogation techniques that the cia used to get information from terror suspects in the wake of the worst terror attack ever on nation, the 9/11 attacks of 2001.