Fmr. CIA Chief Slams NBC's 'Torture Report' Coverage: 'You're Claiming It To Be News'

Appearing on Wednesday's NBC Today, former CIA Director Michael Hayden went after the network for hyping the so-called "torture report" released by Senate Democrats on Tuesday. After Hayden denounced the partisan report as something that "reads like a prosecutorial screed rather than an historical document," co-host Savannah Guthrie pressed him on what he disagreed with. Hayden replied: "Well, I disagree with the fact that you're claiming it to be news. These topics and subjects were all out there."

At the top of the show, fellow co-host Matt Lauer teased the upcoming interview with Hayden: "Cruelty and lies? Outrage over the new report calling out the Bush administration for using brutal and, in one case, deadly techniques on terror suspects post-9/11. This morning a former CIA chief who headed up the program for more than two years, Michael Hayden, joins us live. Did he lie to Congress about what was happening, as the report claims?"

Guthrie lead off the segment by demanding: "I know you don't believe this meets the legal definition of torture, but does it sit right with you? Do Americans have a right to be appalled?"

After Hayden questioned the newsworthiness of rehashing anti-terror methods used a decade ago, Guthrie pushed back:

You're saying it's not news, but in essence this says that what was acknowledged about waterboarding, went much farther. For example, we knew there had been waterboarding, we didn't know that it was described by CIA officers whose saw it as escalating into almost a series of near drownings, that sleep derivation went on up to seven days. So it is more layered in the detail, isn't it?

Hayden pointed out: "It may be more slightly layered in the details, but everyone knows what waterboarding does, it prompts the anti-drowning reflex in an individual."

On Tuesday, even NBC's own chief foreign correspondent Richard Engel doubted the credibility of the Senate report [1], which he observed was "rewriting history" and "settling scores."

Picking up on Lauer's suggestion Wednesday that Hayden lied to Congress about CIA interrogation tactics, Guthrie wondered: "So the report singles you out in particular...lays out testimony you gave to Congress and then where the report alleges there were inconsistencies....Do you feel that you've been accused here of lying and misleading Congress? And what's your response to it?"

Hayden responded:

Well, my response is I didn't lie and I didn't mislead Congress....I was straightforward and honest and gave information as I knew it to be and as the Agency knew it to be. And, Savannah, the Agency's rebuttal to this report broadly supports the outlines, the testimony I gave in 2007. Look, my objective here was to get these people to be part of the game. They spent most of the time yelling at me. So, it was a real opportunity lost.

On Tuesday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams similarly grilled Hayden [2], scolding: "How are we better than our enemies morally in light of what we all read about today?"

Here is a full transcript of Guthrie's December 10 interview with Hayden:

7:04 AM ET

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: General Michael Hayden served as CIA director during the Bush administration from 2006 to 2009. General Hayden, good morning to you.

MICHAEL HAYDEN: Good morning.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: CIA Fights Back On Torture Report; Fmr. CIA Chief On Agency's Controversial Measures]

GUTHRIE: I should say from the outset that most of the conduct we just heard about took place before you were CIA director. And yet, we've heard this morning about this waterboarding that escalated into near drownings, one detainee left naked, got hypothermia, and died. And this is not pleasant to recount, but many instances of rectal rehydration that was medically unnecessary. I know you don't believe this meets the legal definition of torture, but does it sit right with you? Do Americans have a right to be appalled?

HAYDEN: I don't know if they have the right to be appalled. It's probably a good thing that Americans get to know with some accuracy about what the Central Intelligence Agency did on their behalf. I don't know that the report that was released yesterday is that historically accurate report. It reads like a prosecutorial screed rather than an historical document.

GUTHRIE: Do you disagree with anything that was just recited, either by Andrea Mitchell or what we just talked about here?

HAYDEN: Well, I disagree with the fact that you're claiming it to be news. These topics and subjects were all out there. The Gul Rahman death was widely known, the death of another detainee, who was just given to us in Iraq from special forces also known. By the way, Savannah, neither of those deaths were in this program, in the program we're talking about of high-valued detainees that President Bush was talking about in that film clip you just saw.

GUTHRIE: You're saying it's not news, but in essence this says that what was acknowledged about waterboarding, went much farther. For example, we knew there had been waterboarding, we didn't know that it was described by CIA officers whose saw it as escalating into almost a series of near drownings, that sleep derivation went on up to seven days. So it is more layered in the detail, isn't it?

HAYDEN: It may be more slightly layered in the details, but everyone knows what waterboarding does, it prompts the anti-drowning reflex in an individual. And I'm sure it's horrible, but it was also horrible for tens of thousands of American airmen whom we used it against for their training.

GUTHRIE: So the report singles you out in particular, a thirty-eight-page appendix where it lays out testimony you gave to Congress and then where the report alleges there were inconsistencies.

HAYDEN: Right.

GUTHRIE: Do you feel that you've been accused here of lying and misleading Congress? And what's your response to it?

HAYDEN: Well, my response is I didn't lie and I didn't mislead Congress.

And, Savannah, give me a minute here. I know you've got a lot of questions. But let's describe this spring of 2007 conversation I had with both chambers, with both the House and the Senate. I was the first director of CIA to go down and actually convince the White House that we needed to expand knowledge of this program beyond the narrow gang of four or gang of eight. I actually argued within the administration that we needed to tell all of the members of the committee, and that going forward, we needed to devise a plan that wasn't strictly based on just raw presidential authority, but had political support from the other political branch so that going forward this would no longer be identified as George Bush's program, but would be America's program.

So my purpose going down there was to put my arms around the other political branch and try to decide a way forward. I was straightforward and honest and gave information as I knew it to be and as the Agency knew it to be. And, Savannah, the Agency's rebuttal to this report broadly supports the outlines, the testimony I gave in 2007. Look, my objective here was to get these people to be part of the game. They spent most of the time yelling at me. So, it was a real opportunity lost.

GUTHRIE: And, very quickly, I heard you say in the interview a few minutes ago that when CIA officers were conducting these techniques that are listed in the report, they felt they were doing the nation's will.

HAYDEN: Absolutely. Look, the way the nation speaks to us is the president authorizes something, we inform the Congress, the attorney general says it's legal, and the director of CIA says, "I think this is going to be effective. It's worth the gamble." At that point you think you have a social contract with the American people, not with a particular administration. So, what's happening now, these folks having the rug pulled out from under them, people who thought they were doing what we wanted them to do, that's unprecedented.

GUTHRIE: Former CIA Director General Michael Hayden, thank you for your time this morning, sir. Appreciate it.

HAYDEN: Thank you.