From the perspective of someone who has worked with U.K. and U.S. intelligence agencies, the damage done by CIA’s program is so vast that it is hard to fully understand.
Latest in Interrogation: Abuses
To protect the independence of the CIA, its leader must enjoy strong bipartisan support—and that can only come with a nominee who is not disqualified by her deep involvement with and support for torture.
Gina Haspel will testify before the Senate intelligence committee beginning at 9:30 a.m. Eastern on Wednesday.
Gina Haspel was nominated by Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. That makes a huge difference. Here’s why the Senate should confirm her anyway.
A new report by the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group makes clear that it will not be recommending a return to coercive interrogations.
An outline of the legal issues in the D.C. District Court's order in Jawad and Jawad's appellate brief.
When the SSCI initially released its Study on the CIA’s Enhanced Interrogation Program in December 2014, the CIA quietly released a "Note to the Reader," which the Senate Intelligence Committee only became aware of last week. Here's what it says.
Senator Dianne Feinstein replies to Lawfare's Amy Zegart on the SSCI Study of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.
Did the CIA or SSCI Report win the torture debate? Sen. Feinstein's report is more Rohrschach test than smoking gun, unlikely to change opinions on either side.
A little over a week ago, the law firm Sidley Austin LLP submitted its "Independent Review Relating to APA Ethics Guidelines, National Security Interrogations, and Torture" to the APA Board of Directors. Today, the report was released to the public along with a story in the New York Times summarizing its contents. The APA commissioned the report after a heated debate within the organization about whether ethics guidelines developed in 2005 were designed to facilitate toture by the