Senate confirms Trump's pick Gina Haspel to lead CIA. Here are the 6 Democrats who voted 'yes' for torture


Originally published at:


What a surprise!



Just checked to see if any were from CA; our midterm primaries are next month.


…most of whom are up for re-election this November in states Trump won handily in 2016.

If they were trying to appeal to Trump voters, they should have voted against her and explained she was a member of the “deep state” who was fine with breaking the law. That, at least, would have confused them. “Wait, is that a good thing or not?”


Haspel will be the first woman to lead the Central Intelligence Agency.

Well, there’s that.

1 Like

I’m disappointed in Bill Nelson (D) Fla. I just sent him an e-mail telling him so and that I will be carefully re-considering my support in the upcoming elections.


Big deal. Just because she’s a woman doesn’t negate her reputation.



Pretty sure he was being fatalistic/sarcastic.

For me, my greatest hope is that the people who put her in power will eventually fall under her scrutiny, and eventually her knife.

A lot of other people will too, of course. But as long as these fuckers get a taste, then maybe that will be some kind of justice.

I know that’s not how it will go. It’s just a hope.


So… I guess they did it to court the Trump base vote? Since that base is so anti-anything-Democrat, I don’t see how they really expect that to pay off.

It’s like a sheep rolling on the carpet hoping to pick up some loose hair, jumping up and saying, “Look! I’m a wolf just like you!” but without building up enough static to shock the wolves when they start eating him.


To be fair, most of those six Democrats are just barely Democrats.


Honestly surprised not to see DiFi on the list of yes voters.


Yeah, we sure have our share of assbags too…


but she’s promised not to torture again. . . :wink:


I’m gonna be a bit contrary to the bbs shared wisdom here, and say that I don’t find this one too personally distressing. Being an agency lifer and exhibiting general competence matters here. Even if this competence was directed (by her command structure! from above!) in an evil direction a couple of administrations ago. Expressing contrition for past sins versus taking a Trumpian “I never have to apologize for anything, bitches” attitude matters too.

Or maybe I’m just a bit cynical and expect our spooks to have done some evil in the past. That I’d not want to meet one of her teams in a dark alley, but somewhat this is part of the package…

I don’t think she’d be getting elevated to this role if HRC had won the election, but this one I feel like I can file under the “elections have consequences” folder. Like Chris Christie killing the ARC commuter tunnel & rail system upon becoming NJ governor. It’s of a different character than DeVos’s confirmation, or Scott Pruitt’s, which I do not consider simply a pair of “elections have consequences” moments.

Also, this is maybe easier for me to say from a “never have been tortured” position of privilege.

1 Like

My x-wife said the very same thing.


So she was only “following orders?”


Those six don’t matter. We will all be condemned for it.

1 Like

Outsourcing it on the other hand…


It’s not just that Haspel tortured people, and managed people who tortured people, she also organized a cover up and participated in in that cover up herself.

If congresspeoples support torture, then fine, they should vote for people who torture. (And we should vote their asses out of office.) However, Haspel, covered up her participation in torture. So, WTF would a pro-torture congressperson vote for her? I just don’t get why there’s any reason for anyone to vote for her.

I agree that the six Dems who voted for her (as well as all the other people who voted for her) should be voted out of office but I do not think that they bear all of the responsibility for Haspel becoming the CIA director. Obama’s Look Forward Not Backwards approach to bringing Bush-era bureaucrats to justice is also responsible.