GOP Leader To Obama: Only Release Torture Docs That Could Prove Cheney Right
John Boehner and the House GOP leadership have adopted a new position on torture: The only classified info Obama should release about the torture program is that which could prove Dick Cheney’s claim that torture worked to be true.
This is not an exaggeration. It really is their position.
In a meeting at the White House between Congressional leaders and Obama late yesterday, Boehner pushed Obama to release unspecified documents detailing the intel yielded by torture, suggesting they could show torture had been effective, the Times reports.
Boehner elaborated in a statement on his Web site: “I asked the President today to release information about what these interrogation methods yielded, because the American people deserve to make their judgments about this national security matter based on the full set of facts.”
As you know, Cheney has also asked the CIA to declassify memos that detail the same thing.
But Boehner has also repeatedly attacked Obama for releasing the torture memos detailing the actual techniques used, claiming that this compromised our safety. Just yesterday, hours before meeting with Obama, Boehner hammered the memo release as “the latest example of the administration’s disarray when it comes to national security.”
Do any documents actually exist that detail the fruits of torture, but not the techniques used? Who knows, but either way, Boehner’s actual position is that Obama should only release classified info about the torture program that could prove Cheney right.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Did you expect anything else?
I am a lot more concerned with Rep Hoekstra who is now coming out and attesting to things that there is no way he has any information on wrt what Nancy Pelosi was briefed on. I hope the information is released and it shows that the Bush administration did not brief them on waterboarding so she can ask him to apologize AND step down as ranking member of the Intelligence committee. That guy is wreckless.
I was watching Morning Joe this morning and I am trying to figure out WHY in the world Republicans think that they are going to come out on top with regard to this issue…over and over again I listened to Joe say that Republicans win on this issue…why do they think they are so successful??? We were attached on Bush/Cheney watch….they were given a major briefing on terrorist threat here in the US in the beginning of August 2001, yet we were still attacked. They got us into two wars which neither were successfully executed and they still didn’t capture Osama Bin Laden…why do they think the American people are going to see them as more successful??? I don’t get it.
Remember, no matter what is released, Cheney-Boehner will always refer to yet another set of memos that need to be released to prove their point. Gates is right: it all going to come out, incl another set of photoes and the drip drip effect will tells its own tale.
The WH is falling into a trap by trying to manage the discussion. Let it all hang out, and the Repubs will hang themselves.
Just remind Cheney that he went to the Supreme Court to prevent the publication of the names of those who participated in his energy summit.
Jenn D
.
The truth is Scarborough and Hoekstra know they WON’T win and thats why they want to try to scare everybody into not investigating. They wrongly believe that the left will back off if we think Pelosi or any other Dem was involved or if it will hurt Obama politically. They think we think that way because thats the way THEY would see it if they were in the same position. They just don’t get that people actually want to know the truth no matter WHO was involved. At some point the proof will be in the pudding.
JennD: Joe Gasborough has set himself to be the arbiter of what is acceptable as far as Democratic governance is concerned. He is full of himself and he has Pitchfork Pat to help him. He is our Mr Indignant Republican. The hapless Mika is no match. You may recall that Mika’s Dad called Joe “stunningly superficial”. His favorite attack mode: dump on Pelosi.
Joe Scarborough actually had the nerve to say today that the left acts like the are morally superior. Nobody on EARTH tries to come of as morally superior more than Joe Scarborough. This guy thinks his opinion is always the right opinion. Notice how he berates anyone who challenges him to the point where Mika has stockholm syndrome. I notice he hasn’t had Lawrence O’Donnell on since the memos came out. I wonder why that is….
.
http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200904230027?show=1
I am definately aware of Joe and I was watching during “stunningly” episode, it was great. Mika frustrates me because she doesn’t ever seem to debate in a substinative manner…in fact, Tina Brown, of the Daily Beast and John Ridley make the best debaters when it comes to Joe…they give it right back to him when he is “railing”…sometimes he seems slightly reasonable, but most of the time he can’t see the forest through the trees…he is actually trying to debate that torture is ok because it worked (totally debatable)… but to quote Shepard Smith – “I don’t give a rat’s *** if it works, we are America and we don’t f***ing torture” – but it is amazing to watch the “Party of No” becoming the “Party of No, unless it is torture, then Yes”…it is insane…also, Joe is wrong on MANY things…I was watching him all during the primaries and he was constantly wrong about stuff…in the beginning of the primaries, he basically said, over and over again that President Obama was a “flash in the pan” and would never beat out Hillary…also, one time when he was on 1600 with David Gregory’s panel…he was making an argument and Rachel Maddow came back at him with a great point and he got up and walked off the set, right in the middle of the show…it was hysterical…but it is frustrating to me to watch all these Rep’s (I don’t even watch Fox “News”) on tv saying that this torture issue is 1. justified and 2. a winning issue for Rep’s??? They think that the majority of Americans are going to be good with – “Republican’s: Bad for the Economy, Reckless at War, Terrible for Foreign Policy – but Great at Hypocrisy and Torture!”
Well, Jenn, you have taken the measure of this man: he is the quinessential trimmer; and intellectually dishonest to boot.
If you haven’t read Krugman yet (on these related issues)… he gets it right, in my view. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/opinion/24krugman.html?ref=opinion
Jenn D
.
The only thing the GOP has is its same old fear tactics to get elected. Thats what they came to power with and thats what they think they will come back with. Thats why just about every wingnut on Tee Vee or in Congress keeps saying that but for torture there would have been another terror attack and people would have died. O’Liely said the other night that he would torture to save a guests life. They don’t want to focus on whether its legal or not. They also don’t want to focus on the fact that its illogical to say that torturing kept us safe if supposedly they stopped waterboarding in 2003. They just want to “look strong” and make it seem like the Dems won’t “do what it takes” to keep us safe. Ultimately they just don’t want people in their party prosecuted because they know that it will stick to everybody else in the party during election season. They don’t seem to realize that advocating torture will ALSO stick with them during election season.
The “full set of facts” isn’t something Boehner wants released. Furthermore is it Boehners, and thus the Republican parties contention that torture is okay because it worked? Did it have to have a 100% success rate? What if it was a 1% success rate – what about the other 99%? Do we know that the information gained couldn’t have come from legal non-torture interrogations? What does Boehner say to the FBI who walked out of an early interrogation (before the legal cover was even given) and gave an edict that no FBI officers would take part in future interrogations?
What does Boehner say about those ghost detainees who have been disappeared and likely dead? Tortured to death? What about those Gitmo detainees who were 100% innocent and the US knows it and were tortured nonetheless for years? Sorry about their bad luck?
If Boehner and the Republicans want to defend torture, want to be “The Party of Torture” then make them own it completely. Don’t let them tap dance around with phony claims of “partisan attacks”. America tortured! Clinton can be impeached for lying about a ******* and the mediaruns with that for months and months, however investigating the Bush Administration for war crimes is characterized as a political attack? I have a feeling that the media is worried that they’ll be exposed in the mess, that they knew a helluva lot and sat on the story like good little sheep who wanted to keep their access.
Forget “Party of No” the Republicans are the “Party of Torture”
Like I said yesterday about the Scott Shane piece, one thing that we don’t know and that nobody seems to be asking is how long the CIA tried conventional questioning of KSM before they decided to waterboard him. If they only spent a couple of days trying then that in and of itself shows you that they were hell bent on torturing him. And it seems to me that if they waterboarded him 183 times the same month they caught him there is no way to argue that they legitimately tried to question him without torture before they moved on to waterboarding.
“One of those present said that when asked, the CIA officers acknowledged that some foreign intelligence agencies had refused, for example, to share information about the location of terrorism suspects for fear of becoming implicated in any eventual torture of those suspects. Sources said that Jones shared these concerns and that, as a former military officer, he worried that any use of harsh interrogations by the United States could make it more likely that American soldiers in captivity would be subjected to similar tactics.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/23/AR2009042304718_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2009042304720
Here’s a question. Who all are the Republicans and chatterers making this case that the torture memos shouldn’t have been released (though now they want more to be) and that torture works? HuffPo put up a video of Norah O’Donnell interviewing Liz Cheney who was vociferous on all these points. She’s sort of a tell. Without doing the hunting to find out who all is talking about this and what talking points they’re coordinating, it does seem as if it’s the Cheney circle and supporters raising the ruckus to forestall investigations or prosecutions or commissions. I assume the point is both to protect themselves and to put everyone on notice that they won’t make any of this easy. Nothing new there.
The Republicans have been losing their ’security’ advantage to the Dems and this is their chance to recapture it. The latest Pew poll shows that 70% of respondents feel that torture is often, sometimes, or rarely justified. The Rassmussen poll shows that 58% of respondents feel that Obama’s decision to release these memos endangers national security. 58% also said that the Obama admin should not investigate the Bush admin on interrogation. As regards Boner: It’s quite possible to feel that releasing info about the techniques used is harmful while also believing that releasing info about the intelligence gained is not harmful. At least four Dems were briefed on these techniques – if they are war crimes then these congressmen should be prosecuted.
sbj said
.
At least four Dems were briefed on these techniques – if they are war crimes then these congressmen should be prosecuted
.
I know you don’t understand this sbj but everyone on the left agrees with you.
Really?
So you are not buying Pelosi’s bullshit? Do you think she should step down – along with Harmon and Rockefeller?
“70% of respondents feel that torture is often/sometimes/rarely justified” – So this makes torture ok? It is still a crime under the laws of our Land! I would bet that 70% of respondents would also feel that Ellie Nesler was justified in shooting and killing the man that was accused of molesting her son, but that does not mean that she didn’t deserve to be prosecuted for the crime! The United States prosecuted the Japanese after World War II for waterboarding our soldiers, but now it is ok for the US to do it because of 9/11. Pearl Harbor was just as devastating to my grandparents generation, as 9/11 was to us, but that doesn’t mean that we are LEGALLY justified in torturing detainees. All I can say is that the GOP is really scraping the bottom of the very empty barrel if it is trying to become the “Party of Torture”…I am sure that will motivate the majority of Americans to start listening to them…and by the way, our Country WAS NOT safer under Bush/Cheney…this Country was attacked under Bush/Cheney, and after all of the “success” they claim to have, we are now involved in two wars that were insufficiently executed, we have lost over 4000 American soldiers and they still didn’t capture Osama Bin Laden. That is an interesting definition of success. And, I think I will go with Shepard Smith from Fox News on this one – “I don’t give a rat’s *** if it works, we are America and we do not f***ing torture!!” Have a great day!
I did not try to make the point that torture was okay. I was making a point about the Dem’s recent gains on national security and how it is taking a hit with the release of these memos.
Regards torture, I believe most Repubs are still of the opinion that no torture was committed. The entire purpose of these memos was to provide legal justification for the techniques to show that they did not constitute torture. No one has even proved that torture was committed, least of all war crimes.
I always look to Shep for insightful political analysis myself.
This country was attacked under Clinton, too. You can huff and puff all you want but you can’t change the fact that after 9/11 we have not been attacked on US soil.
You have a great day, too. I insist.
No huffing and puffing here, first of all, waterboarding is torture, it meets the definition of torture, maybe the Republicans that you choose to listen to don’t think so, but plenty of Republicans have stated the waterboarding is torture, even John McCain, who we all acknowledge is a reliable source on the subject. And if waterboarding was not considered torture, then why the need for all of the legal memos?? If waterboarding isn’t torture, then why did the Bush Administration need the legal opinions? If they didn’t consider it torture, then they wouldn’t have sought the opining on the subject. But they knew better, which is why the sought the legal memos to cover their collective selves. Also, everyone acknowledges that we were attacked under Clinton as well, but most Dems and Indy’s don’t try to make the argument that one political party is “better” for the Country’s national security than another. It is Repubs that have to try and hang their hat on that argument, they even tried to “scare” voters during the NY-20 special election by dropping Osama Bin Laden into a TV ad and look how well that worked out for them in a heavily Republican district no less. And we are ALL thankful that we have not been attacked on US soil since 9/11, but you can’t change the fact that we were attacked under the Bush/Cheney administration and they were even warned about a terrorist hit on US soil in August 2001, but they did not take any action at that time in order to protect our citizens further. It wasn’t until after the 9/11 attack that they “found their voice” on “protecting the American people”. Perhaps the better question is what I proposed in my last post – how is it that Republicans are “stronger” on national security when we have gotten ourselves into two wars, lost over 4000 American soldiers and still didn’t capture Osama Bin Laden “Dead or Alive”? Too bad there is not more Republican “outrage” over this fact.
Question for everyone and please can someone try to answer it and refrain from name calling. Its a serious question…
Can anyone here point me to the U.S. law that was broken during these interrogations? I really could not find a U.S. law. I found Geneva law and U.N. laws against it.
Also since the interrogations happened off U.S. soil, should the people involved be prosecuted internationally?
Also if Nancy Pelosi is also found to have known about the interrogation methods, should we through her in the mix as well?
For some reason I think the people on the left will let Pelosi slide. If knew that a crime was being committed and didn’t inform the authorities about it, you better believe I would be prosecuted along with the criminals. Pelosi, Channey, and Bush sharing a jail cell…
Got news for you Joe when we sign treaties or documents such as the Geneva Accords they become US Law. The Convention Against Torture was ratified in 1994 giving it the Status of US Law. Also in 1994 congress adopted the Torture Statute, which provides criminal liability for a U.S. national who tortures a person outside of the United States. Also the War Crimes act of 1996. Besides life imprisonment or the death penalty for torturing someone to death the War Crimes Act states that anyone charged with breaking the Geneva conventions can also be tried under the war crimes act. There’s also the Torture Victim Protection Act that states that victims of torture can seek damages. We also convicted a Texas County Sheriff in the 80s for using waterboarding against prisoners.
The “Dems knew it, too” strikes me as a completely false thread. I would be more skeptical of Pelosi’s protests, had I not heard Sen. Rockefeller, throughout 2005-2006 on radio (Ed Schultz) discussing much of this same area. (At the time, he was merely the ranking member of the minority on the Senate Intelligence Committee).
Rockefeller was at great pains (you could hear it in his voice) to explain that :
(1) The briefings were irregular, sometimes incomplete as he learned later, and they were TOLD what was going on, not ASKED about it.
(2) That the briefings were just that, briefings. They could object to their hearts’ content — doubtlessly, they should have, if they didn’t — but it didn’t matter a rat’s behind. They couldn’t stop anything, they couldn’t influence anything, and that
(3) They were bound by law NOT to reveal anything that they’d heard publicly.
This was in direct regard to the wiretapping program, but also applied to WH Briefings to the “Gang of Eight”. If this is true, which I have no reason to doubt, seeing as it was stated back when the GOP was cementing their permanent majority, then I am unsure of exactly what any member of Congress would be prosecuted for, in regards to the torture program.
Now, if you want to haul some people into the dock for approving the Patriot Act, let’s talk.
– G.K.
Most people, and especially liberals, don’t know or willfully ignore the fact that “rendition” of terrorism suspects to other countries was a well-established practice under Clinton and other predecessors.
Read it at the site for the Foreign Relations Commitee.
Abrasive you do know there’s a difference between regular rendition and the “extraordinary rendition” that has been taking place. Rendition is a simple legal term and usually has to do with extradition. Rendition is the follow up to rendition and is the transfer of a person from one state or country to another. Extradition and rendition go hand and hand. Extraordinary renditions purpose is to go outside the protections of the law for the purpose of putting prisoners in countries where cruel and unusual punishment is known to take place. Clinton and other presidents did the legal rendition
Rendition is a “simple term” if, and only if, you’re a chickenhawk, no nothing, Faux News watcher. Pathetic supporters of torture. If shame was possible for you, I would wish it on you.
Where did this misguided notion arise that torture is useful? I assert it was the _fictional_ TV show “24″ and the inability of Cheney and Bush to accept reality. Jack Bauer is a cartoon.
Professional US Interrogators in the military, FBI and CIA all know that torture does not produce _reliable intelligence_. We have demonstrated for more than 7 decades that rapport-building techniques not only works, it works for Israel too.
What Cheney and his minions including Liz, Boehner and the FauxNews gang are doing is employing a number of canards to mask the facts.
The SERE training _is_ torture. If US military are captured and put through the procedures used in SERE training, the US would assert they were tortured. This is why our pilots, Seals, and others whose missions take them behind enemy lines are given SERE training.
Another canard is that knowing the torture techniques will defeat them. This is whale excrement that has never seen the light of day. Torture is designed to “break the subject” not to reveal information. Once the subject has been broken, the fantasy for centuries has been they will talk openly. Knowing what is coming doesn’t change one’s ability to avoid “breaking.” Read Robert Coram’s book about Bud Day, a captive with John McCain.
John McCain and 650 other Americans demonstrated that despite severe torture in North Vietnam, despite “breaking” physically and psychologically, they deceived their captors. None revealed widely known secrets. Many of these American prisoners did not have SERE training.
The technique the North Vietnamese never used was rapport-building and trust building. The Americans believed they were morally superior, and the North Vietnamese proved it through their violence.
Once an interrogator resorts to violence, you will never regain the complete trust of the prisoner. They will always withhold some part of the truth.
One more item:
I thought of this the other day, but others see exactly the same issue. Cheney has been DESPERATELY seeking to justify the invasion of Iraq since the first cabinet meeting in January 2001.
Since none of the prisoners volunteered the al-Qaeda/Saddam link under traditional interrogation, Cheney escalated to extremes of torture in an effort to get the desired answer to fit his pre-conceived notion. Evidence is coming out that when the interrogators reported no link, Cheney’s group said, “wrong answer.”
Have we seen this pattern before from Cheney? Yes – Valerie Plame is the easy example. Sacrificing Scooter Libby was further proof. The entire Doug Feith Office of Special (sic) Plans stovepipe was proof. And then there’s the entire set of hiding the reports from British intelligence, promoting Curveball, etc.
Watching Liz Cheney’s spiel was a hint of what it will be like when David Addington and Dick Cheney tries to bulldoze congress. The phrases have been carefully honed and memorized to be deceptive circular logic. I didn’t realize Liz Cheney was read into the interrogation memos back in 2002, but her talking points make her sound as though she was there.