Whatever Peter Thiel’s motivation in endorsing Trump, the tech billionaire knows from personal experience that one of the Republican’s principal lines of attack on Hillary Clinton is false.
In an April 29 press release the Department of Justice noted that Simmons “falsely claimed he spent 27 years working for the Central Intelligence Agency” and had pleaded guilty “to major fraud against the government, wire fraud, and a firearms offense.”
When Gul Rahman was taken to the “salt pit,” a then-secret CIA prison in Afghanistan, he was given a psychological evaluation by CIA contractor Bruce Jessen.
“Well, the average person might understand it as truth serum, but you know there are ways where you decrease a person’s conscious defenses, and they might be more willing to give up information.”
A group of former CIA, FBI, DEA and military intelligence officials is urging presidential candidates to reject torture as an interrogation tool.
So here is yet another absurd episode, humiliating both for Rep. Trey Gowdy and the journalists who promoted this fraudulent story, and highly reminiscent of the bogus “criminal referral” leak that made the front page of the New York Times last summer.
Fox “expert” on national security — and Benghazi — bogusly portrayed himself as an “Outside Paramilitary Special Operations Officer” for the CIA from 1973 to 2000, says the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
In his book The Great War of Our Time, former CIA deputy Director Michael Morell explains the blunder that led to Saddam Hussein being deposed and sent him into hiding in a spider hole.
Dreamland is a tale of two artificial and highly permeable membranes. One separates legal and illegal drugs, the other Mexico and the United States.
Republican staffers on the House Select Committee on Benghazi plainly leaked Clinton emails to the paper of record — in frustration that their probe is headed nowhere.
Mohamedou Ould Slahi, a prisoner at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, wrote a 466-page memoir from his cell, which is a hellish account of perpetual torture.
If there are lessons to be extracted from these three books, they have as much to do with the dangers of elite consensus as with those of dissent.