And they're off!

We're at a a very weird phase in the torture story. With AG Holder having lots of lieutenants "leak" that he's thinking of naming a special prosecutor for torture and detainee issues, the game for those involved has substantially changed. So stories like this one in the WaPo take on new meaning. Those very involved, now have an incentive to "leak" their exculpatory versions of what happened.

So, as you read the inevitable torture stories over the next month, keep in mind that there's a much bigger game being played: Who does this version protect and who does it put in the jackpot? How much specific detail is revealed to try and accomplish those goals.

For example,

Now, as the Senate intelligence committee examines the CIA's interrogation program, investigators are focusing in part on Mitchell and John "Bruce" Jessen, former CIA contractors who helped design and oversee Abu Zubaida's interrogation. These men have been portrayed as eager proponents of coercion, but the former U.S. official, whose account was corroborated in part by Justice Department documents, said they also rejected orders from Langley to prolong the most severe pressure on the detainee. The former official's account, alongside the recollections of those familiar with events at the CIA's secret prison in Thailand, yields a more nuanced understanding of their role than has previously been available.

Smell the spin? According to this version, the contract psychologists who developed all the horrors aren't really so bad. By this recounting, if you want to find the real bastards, look to folks at Langley.

This Senate Intelligence Committee investigation wouldn't normally be that big of a deal, but as it could likely be foundational to any future DOJ investigation, there is a huge incentive for those at the sharp end to try and shape the politics and perception of it. (Unlike a prosecutor's investigation, Congressional investigations are extremely political, investigating towards the participants' interests, not the thorough neutrality of a criminal investigation.)

So, the politics of this are extremely important. Those at the focus will be spinning incredibly hard and trying to get out front to shape the Senators' perceptions and interests. This story probably signals the breaking of the stone wall, and we may now see alot of ugly details as everyone tries to turn the focus on everyone else.

(The crazy thing is that once Holder actually launches an investigation, everybody will probably shut up again. ("...will not comment on an ongoing investigation..."))

And, This post is to add context, not to minimize this story. There's a lot of detail throughout. Worth a full read.