Share This Article with a Friend!

Conservative Senators Must Oppose Gina Haspel For CIA Director

Even though we tended to agree with Senator Rand Paul and were not fans of Gina Haspel’s nomination to head the CIA when President Trump first announced it, we were willing to give the President the benefit of the doubt on the nomination and forebear active opposition to the nomination.

However, that forbearance was turned into active opposition by Haspel’s performance at her confirmation Gina Haspelhearing.

Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia asked Ms. Haspel, "If this president asked you to do something that you find morally objectionable, even if there is an [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion, what will you do? Will you carry out that order or not?"

"Senator, my moral compass is strong," Haspel said. "I would not allow CIA to undertake activity that I thought was immoral – even if it was technically legal. I would absolutely not permit it." Prodded again by Warner, Haspel said, "No. I believe that CIA must undertake activities that are consistent with American values."

When Haspel said she would disregard or violate an order from the Commander-in-Chief by saying, “I would not allow CIA to undertake activity that I thought was immoral, even if it was technically legal. I absolutely would not permit it,” our radar went to Red Alert.

Aren’t we now just beginning to understand how a corrupt intelligence apparatus spied on Americans, tried to influence the 2016 election and pursued its own political objectives – and if Obama is to be believed – did so outside of any accountability to the constitutionally elected Congress and President?

While Ms. Haspel would like us to believe that her newfound higher moral principles are limited to the “enhanced interrogation” methods opposed by Senator Paul, Senator McCain, Senator Warner and other Democrats, what is to keep her from disobeying any other legal presidential order – like “don’t unmask the American identities of political candidates and campaigns” or “step up the surveillance of Islamist organizations” simply because they do not comport with her moral compass?

What Ms. Haspel announced publicly she would do as CIA Director is exactly what the Deep State has been doing throughout the government to try to thwart President Trump and his Make America Great Again agenda – substituting the judgement of unelected anonymous bureaucrats for the judgement of the duly elected President and Congress.

And the Deep State is all for her.

As CNN opinion writer Carrie Sheffield noted, “Haspel has won the backing of national security officials from the right and left, including former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-Neb.), former Obama CIA director Leon Panetta, immediate past CIA director Mike Pompeo (who named her his top deputy), Michael Hayden, former head of both the CIA and the National Security Agency under George W. Bush, as well as James Clapper, former director of national intelligence in the Obama administration. Haspel has even won the backing of John Brennan, CIA director under Obama and an outspoken critic of Trump.

“Haspel has also won the backing of Jeremy Bash, a former Obama administration Defense Department official and CIA chief of staff, who called Haspel "the rare CIA director nominee that both parties should love. "

"We need more people like Gina Haspel. Democrats and progressive organizations should be encouraged that a nonpartisan, professional woman has been nominated to be CIA director," Bash wrote according to Ms. Sheffield.

In her testimony yesterday, Gina Haspel gave conservatives a rare insight into how operatives of the Deep State think and work – and it should scare everyone who saw it or has read about it.

What’s more, Haspel gave conservatives concerned about Russia, China and the war Islam has declared on the West absolutely no reason to vote for her, while believers in the rule of law and the Constitution as the law that governs government now have every reason to oppose her nomination.

Our friend Rick Manning of Americans for Limited Government may have said it best: “While she may have honorably served under now Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Haspel’s testimony putting her judgment about legal orders above that of the Commander and Chief makes her unfit to serve as CIA Director, and President Trump should do the nation a service and withdraw her, already controversial, nomination from further consideration.”

The toll-free Capitol Switchboard is (1-866-220-0044) we urge CHQ readers and friends to call their Senators today to urge them to oppose the nomination of Gina Haspel for Director of the CIA.

George Rasley is editor of Richard Viguerie's and is a veteran of over 300 political campaigns. A member of American MENSA, he served on the staff of Vice President Dan Quayle, as Director of Policy and Communication for Congressman Adam Putnam (FL-12) then Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs, and as spokesman for Rep. Mac Thornberry now-Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Share this


I'm not sure what to think. Haspel could have easily answered Warner's question. She isn't subject to the UCMJ. The answer is simply that she would refuse to do something that she thought was immoral, but she would immediately tender her resignation, as the President has every right to expect that his lawful orders be obeyed. That should have ended the matter, but that wasn't her answer, and the Dems got her to continue that "she" wouldn't allow the CIA to violate "her" conscience. Who is she? She isn't elected. I am concerned about this.

Perhaps she did not really mean what she said. If so, she needs to clarify her testimony.

I don't she implied that

I don't she implied that torture is "consistent with American values" at all. Waterboarding isn't torture; "Torture doesn't work," Dems say. Waterboarding and other "enhanced" techniques got results and so aren't torture; that they _worked_ proves this.

The comment about the "incidentally" stuff is just stupid. Maybe those so-called Constitutional scholars should find new fields of work.

I disagree. Conservative

I disagree. Conservative Republican Senators (all Republicans, actually) should support here simply because the President of their Party has chosen her.

And I think all those "morality" questions made a joke of the proceedings.

CIA Boss

First and foremost I watched the interrogation of Miss Haspel. I did not see the same thing you are printing. I saw her answer the man with a answer, he did not want to hear.She would not give a yes or no answer, I thought she handled herself, very professionally. You are printing half truths, instead of the whole truth. You are no better than the fake news organizations. she made the Senators look like idiots, they can't handle that.Stop spreading lies like MSM.

Americans & Constitutional Values Oppose Haspel CIA

I agree that Haspel's own Senate hearing testimony strengthens the case against her nomination.

"Senator, my moral compass is strong," Haspel said. "I would not allow CIA to undertake activity that I thought was immoral – even if it was technically legal. I would absolutely not permit it." Prodded again by Warner, Haspel said, "No. I believe that CIA must undertake activities that are consistent with American values."

In addition to Rasley's "Red Alert" points I find the most damning detail of Haspel's own words is that she apparently considers torture (and, incidentally, political candidate surveillance) to be "consistent with American values".