Yesterday we learned that the CIA had videos of its "enhanced interrogation techniques," which it hid from lawmakers, federal investigators, a federal court, and the 9/11 Commission -- and then intentionally destroyed to cover up its culpability.

The agency treated the elimination of incriminating evidence as a rather routine decision, but the NYT reports today that the CIA destroyed the videos over the objections of, well, practically everyone.

White House and Justice Department officials, along with senior members of Congress, advised the Central Intelligence Agency in 2003 against a plan to destroy hundreds of hours of videotapes showing the interrogations of two operatives of Al Qaeda, government officials said Friday.

The chief of the agency's clandestine service nevertheless ordered their destruction in November 2005, taking the step without notifying even the C.I.A.'s own top lawyer, John A. Rizzo, who was angry at the decision, the officials said.

And what might have been on the destroyed evidence? Kevin Drum has a very good post on the subject, but summarizes:

So here's what the tapes would have shown: not just that we had brutally tortured an al-Qaeda operative, but that we had brutally tortured an al-Qaeda operative who was (a) unimportant and low-ranking, (b) mentally unstable, (c) had no useful information, and (d) eventually spewed out an endless series of worthless, fantastical "confessions" under duress. This was all prompted by the president of the United States, implemented by the director of the CIA, and the end result was thousands of wasted man hours by intelligence and law enforcement personnel.

Nice trifecta there. And just think: there's an entire political party in this country that still thinks this is OK.

To paraphrase Homer Simpson, "Republicans, I think he's talking to you."