Politico: CIA chief will brief senators on Khashoggi killing
CIA Director Gina Haspel will brief Senate committee leaders on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi on Tuesday after members of both parties expressed outrage over the absence of intelligence officials at a briefing last week.
The spy chief will meet with top leaders of the Senate‘s Armed Services Committee, Foreign Relations Committee and Intelligence Committee, according to a source familiar with the matter. The meeting comes ahead of a scheduled vote on whether the Senate will vote to pull support for the civil war in Yemen.
The number of attendees at the briefing could grow given the concern among both parties about Khashoggi's killing at the Saudi Arabian Consulate in Istanbul earlier this year.
Read more ....
Update #1: CIA director will brief small group of lawmakers on Khashoggi murder (CNN)
Update #2: CIA chief to brief lawmakers on Khashoggi murder: senator (AFP)
WNU Editor: The hearing started at 11:00 EST, and it has ended. The Senators are already expressing their opinions ....
After CIA briefing, Republicans say 'no question' Saudi crown prince ordered Khashoggi murder (ABC News)
Khashoggi murder: Saudi crown prince 'crazy', says US senator (BBC)
Corker: Saudi crown prince would be convicted of murder in ‘30 minutes’ (Politico)
US senators: 'Zero doubt' MBS complicit in Khashoggi killing (Al Jazeera)
GOP senators rip Saudi prince after briefing: 'There's a smoking saw' (The Hill)
Top senators briefed by CIA blame Saudi prince for Khashoggi death (Reuters)
17 comments:
Sen Lindsey Graham is convinced MBs is a murderer...... kinda surprised me. I wonder if Trudeau will ever mention Saudi Arabia in public again.
"convicted of murder in 30 minutes," "zero doubt," "crazy," "smoking saw," so this is how we conduct investigations now in the United States. Don't even bother with a real investigation. Just bring up the prosecution, hear their side, and don't even bother with anything else. Oh, and never mind America's broader geopolitical interests or the economic or security interests of the American people while grandstanding.
When doing a real investigation, it would not make sense to only gather information from one side to begin with. This is even more so when considering the overall poor track record of US (un)intelligence services. They may be reliable as third source perhaps to corroborate information obtained from more reliable sources but I would not rely on this as a primary source for pretty much anything.
poster! stop it...that group of senators got full story from our intel! that, sir, is how we conduct biz...you would not know this since you are a troll
Nato accuses Russia of breaking nuclear missile treaty
What say ye to this one, trollster?
Anon (2:51PM),
The end result of this will likely mean torching our relations with Saudi Arabia at a time when we are in a new Cold War with Russia as well as Cold Wars with both Iran and China just to name two. This is something the adults would need to think about. By all indications the Muslim Brotherhood supporting "journalist" isn't worth this. The adults will need to restore some semblance of common sense.
As for our intelligence services, given the track record, Iraq WMD, 911, failing to understand Afghanistan, failing to understand Iraq, and I could go on, it would be unwise to conduct "biz" relying on only our a briefing from our CIA. Inquisitive people try to find out. In such serious matters it pays to be inquisitive.
Anon (2:58PN),
I'm fully aware of the accusations on both sides. I hope and pray we can all work through this in a manner that is equitable to all involved. Frankly certain people on our side need to stop trying undermine diplomatic efforts. At least this is my considered opinion.
As for the "troll" accusation, I think this comes about when you don't have point to make and have to come up with some cute. If you have something constructive to add, please do so.
1.)Relying on an organization (CIA) whose track record is questionable at best just doesn't seem to me like a good way to conduct "biz" in such a high stakes environment as this. I think the Senators need to seek out more information before jumping to conclusions.
2.)We're going to need more information than just "NATO allegations" to determine the full parameters of this. From what I can tell, both parties may well have valid concerns. I think it is safe to say that reckless behavior when dealing with arguably the world's most powerful country is not a prudent way to conduct foreign policy. We've had numerous diplomatic avenues undercut by such reckless behavior. This is bound to create problems for us.
yeah a real investigation like the donkey show muller is putting on. Pfft give your head a shake.
You know better? you can prove intel from CIA and NSA is wrong or made up? what basis do you have for your ready dismissal other than the fact you want to believe the Prince of Liars, aka orange julius, and not the trained and experienced intel people? What reason would they have to lie?
Americanadian soldier,
The Mueller investigation is a similar concept. Essentially decide the end result ahead of time and then build the case for the forgone conclusion whole cloth from scratch if necessary.
In some places the government kills the opposition. In America the government uses "lawfare" against those they don't like. Essentially the end result is an attempt to ruin the life of the person or people they don't like.
Dear Trollster:
The govt now is Trump and the GOP...I guess that makes your statement silly at best, if one is being kind
Mueller has not decided anything. If you know otherwise, tell us your source. You are flinging out crap and hoping it sticks. It doesn't
GOP senators come out and say it: The Trump administration is covering up Khashoggi’s killing
So is Xi, Putin, Obama as he ordered assassinations of US citizens without trial and due process, Maduro, Fidel was a big time murderer, countless African heads of states, PLO leaders, Erdogan. Are the Dems and GOpers asking for indictments for them too?
Phony outrage. I have no love for the Saudi's but I do understand the strategic alliance with the USA. It is very financially beneficial to the USA, lose that connection and the USA goes into depression cuz the role of the Petro Dollar ends and the world will suddenly have trillions of unneeded dollars...paper with fast dropping value.
Kill that alliance if you want, just know the consequences. As always the poor will suffer hard and lasting poverty here in the US.
Fred,
As I pointed out, US intel does not have a good track record. I named several examples above. As such, I would not be so quick to trust everything they say at face value. Before we reach final conclusions we need to carefully weigh all evidence especially when the stakes are as high as they are.
I don't think its up to me to prove they are wrong. They need to prove they are correct. Actually its up to Congress to conduct a proper investigation. At least I think this is what they are supposed to be doing.
I never said I wanted to believe Trump. With that said given the poor track record of the "trained and experienced" people, when there is doubt, I would be inclined to trust the judgment of Trump the international business person and experienced negotiator over these people. As to "prince of liars" this would need to be proven. Again, the people making the claims have credibility issues themselves.
As I understand it, the federal government consists of the executive branch, the judicial branch, and legislative branch. Additionally, within the federal government we have the various agencies and within this we get what some call the "deep state." Much of the government both democrat and republican made it clear they did not want Trump as their president. Now I believe they are using what I term "lawfare" to try and remove a duly elected president. I've seen this done numerous times. I've just never seen it done to a duly elected president.
I have a great deal of indirect experience with this sort of thing. The way Trump described the prosecution as angry, yelling at people, and trying to intimidate people into giving them what they want is how a prosecution that is not getting what they want has been described to me multiple times. This is the case when a.)the prosecution has personal animosity towards the target of investigation, and b.)the prosecution is under intense pressure from those higher up than him/her to find something, anything on the target. This appears to be the case here.
The trollster slur comes out when you have nothing to offer in support of your position and then you have to accuse me of "flinging out crap" hoping a cute insult will discredit the other position.
Anon (4:23PM),
You are 100% correct. I've been trying to express this but have not been able to express it this well. Essentially the correct term for this may be "realpolitik."
"Phony outrage...." this paragraph expresses the situation perfectly. Essentially you torch this relationship, this will have devastating consequences for America and Americans. While we have no love for the Saudis, a replacement government would likely be even worse. Also, I strongly suspect we rely heavily upon them to fill in the gaps where our intelligence services fail.
"Kill that alliance if you want...." truth be known I don't that most republicans or democrats have even thought through any of this. If the Trump Administration is "covering up" this, perhaps they are looking carefully at the interests of the American people as a whole and are trying to behave like the adults in the room. From the best I can tell, on his best day the "journalist" in questions isn't worth this.
Postfake
slow down...you posted comments throughout the afternoon (EST) and yet you claim you have job in Texas
the deep state BS is what those who feel there are forces directing their lives that they can not understand etc is just a blanket accusation sans any evidence whatsoever.
indirect experience? I have had direct experience. and again, you want to defend Trump but even his own gop senators not willing to on this issue.
I do not plan to waste more time on this issue.
That Saudi prince is a killer and he murdered a man that was bringing to light how the Saudis deal with human rights. You defend him if you must (your job) but decent folks no longer will
Lapides,
You have had "direct experience"? Of what? Your own words (yes yours) believe that, don't worry about wasting time no one is better than you at that, and since when has lack of evidence ever bothered you? I admire your courage in plowing on without any. Yes you are a nasty little man.
Fred,
"Postfake," when the argument is weak as yours is, this is when you try and discredit the other with an insult. If you can somehow discredit my character, you think this gets you out of having to address your arguments based upon their merit.
I've already revealed where I am, who I am, and how to find me. Now in answer to the first paragraph, I multitask. I've spent a large portion of my day waiting for people today and I prepare for my meetings in advance. During the time when I am waiting I will often read warnewsupdates and comment. today has been one of those days. The back and forth dialogue is an excellent opportunity to learn.
As for the deep state, essentially I mean unelected government officials who can and often do have profound influence over our lives. For example, some government agencies have their own court systems whereby a person can literally be bankrupted before they can get to a real court.
I'm not defending Trump but he does seem to be the only behaving somewhat like an adult here. As such, perhaps it could be argued I am defending him because much of the rest of the government is behaving so irrationally. As for GOP Senators, they've never exactly been very supportive anyway. At least this is how it appears to me.
"I do not plan to waste any more time on this issue." I understand. When the argument is lost, move on.
"That Saudi prince...." I understand the CIA tells us so then it must be so. Just take it at face value and don't even bother with a real investigation all while ignoring the fact that the CIA track record is spotty at best. Anon (4:23PM) already pretty much explained in pretty good detail what the likely consequences will be of torching this relationship.
Maybe we need to do so. Perhaps now with the advent of fracking we can actually afford to do so. Unfortunately I don't think much of the GOP or the Democrats have even thought through much of this.
As anon (4:23PM) points out it is going to be the poor. University professors, government employees, and senators and representatives generally always do well no matter how the economy as a whole does. I would add that if we lose intelligence sharing with the Saudis our job just gets that much harder to deal with mutual adversaries and to defend America. The powers that be could at least think this through and act carefully. To have made such rash statements after a meeting with the CIA director and nothing else suggests to me a group of people who aren't thinking things through carefully.
Sometimes my grammar and sentence structure are off. My eyesight is poor and I do not utilize a proof reader for this work. My job is as a Certified Public Accountant. I do not get paid for this as I have been accused of. Such accusations are leveled without merit. While I cannot say for certain why someone does this, I suspect it is because they know the arguments they present are full of holes and they hope that by discrediting others they will not have to address their points based upon merit.
I've noticed part of the government's messaging strategy is to label those who disagree with the official position that they take and challenge them on the internet either via Facebook, Twitter, or some other means as "trolls" or to accuse them of representing a foreign power. Some others are apparently employing the same trick.
Post a Comment