Former director Michael Hayden feels that he and his colleagues have been wronged:
It’s as if we were tried and convicted in absentia. We were not given an opportunity to mount a defense. And there was no discovery process by which alleged evidence could be revealed and challenged.
Friedersdorf puts this in its appropriate context:
So imprisoning Muslims without charges or trial is morally defensible, as Hayden sees it, as is killing without due process, even when scores of children predictably die as “collateral damage,” and even when U.S. citizens are targeted in secret. The no-fly list? Also just fine, no interviews required. But criticizing Hayden in a Senate report that was researched for years, based on CIA documents, and given to the current CIA director to review before publication? Criticizing him in a report that results in no penalties whatsoever without due process? That’s an outrage to him. Why, a man’s reputation is at stake!