L. Cheney: U.S. Did "Not Cross That Line Into Torture"
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Speaking today with MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell, Liz Cheney defended her father's view that harsh interrogation tactics yielded valuable intelligence information. She qualified, though, that: "The tactics are not torture. We did not torture. The memos laid out the extent of exactly how far we could go before it would become torture, because it was important we not cross that line into torture."
And this exchange:
O'Donnell: "I want to get back again - we can debate this, but I want to get back to specifically, what role the vice president had in directing lawyers to authorize these memos. Was it from the vice president's office, Dick Cheney, who said to those men -- John Yoo, Jay Bybee - we need to come up with a way to interrogate these al Qaeda suspects after 9/11? Why doesn't he own up to the fact that he was the prime mover behind that?"
L. Cheney: "Norah, there was no direction of lawyers from the vice president. That's not how this process worked. And I think that you can look at exactly how the process worked, which is, the CIA said we have Abu Zubaydah, and we think he's got important information that further attacks are imminent and therefore, we need to know what we can do. And the National Security Council met and discussed this. This is actually all laid out in Senator Rockefeller's timeline, which doesn't say what you're alleging that it says, which makes clear that the questions laid out to OlC were, what's possible and when. And if you've read the memos, in fact, that were released, you'll see that they were very, very careful in laying out exactly what could be done and for exactly how long."
Watch the interview above. Full transcript, per MSNBC, available after the jump.
TRANSCRIPT: LIZ CHENEY DEFENDS HER FATHER ON MSNBC
NEW YORK - April 23, 2009 - Liz Cheney, former deputy assistant secretary of state during the Bush administration and the daughter of the former vice president, Dick Cheney spoke to MSNBC's Norah O'Donnell earlier today about new information that suggests her father signed off on harsh interrogation practices.
NORAH O'DONNELL, MSNBC ANCHOR: Also, there may be some new information today on who signed off on tough tactics to question terrorists. The Senate Intelligence Committee now says Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice helped direct a small group of Justice Department lawyers who wrote memos authorizing these harsh interrogation practices. Also, Rice gave the first verbal OK for the use of waterboarding in July 2002.
Liz Cheney is a former deputy assistant secretary of state during the Bush administration and the daughter of the former vice president, Dick Cheney.
Liz, good to see you. Thanks so much for joining us.
LIZ CHENEY, FORMER U.S. DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE: Thanks, Norah. Good to be here.
O'DONNELL: Did the former vice president, Dick Cheney, was he the prime mover behind directing this small group of Justice Department lawyers to come up with an authorization for these harsh tactics?
L. CHENEY: That's actually not what the document says that you're referring to. There's absolutely no question that this was a program that was widely approved and supported within the administration. I think there's no secret here that the National Security Council reviewed the program. The National Security Council ensured that it had legal approval before going forward with these techniques.
But I want to go back to one thing we heard the attorney general say, Norah, which I found troubling. He said that he had not seen the memos or any memos talking about the effectiveness of this program. And I think it's very important for people to ask the question, had the president, before President Obama made the decision to release the tactics and the techniques, had nobody reviewed the effectiveness of the program? Had his attorney general and the president himself looked at whether in fact these programs had gained intelligence that was critical for saving -- for the security of the nation?
O'DONNELL: Well Liz, we'll get to that argument in a minute, about do the means justify the ends. Whether torture justifies...
L. CHENEY: Well, it wasn't torture, Norah, so that's not the right way to lay out the argument.
O'DONNELL: OK.
L. CHENEY: Everything done in this program, as has been laid out and described before, are tactics that our own people go through in SEER training and that our own people have gone through for many years. So it's really - does a fundamental disservice to those professionals who are conducting this very effective program and to those people who approved the program in order to keep this nation safe and prevent attacks through the program to call it torture.
O'DONNELL: Liz, the CIA, on its own after 2005, stopped waterboarding on its own. The U.S. prosecuted people for waterboarding after World War II.
So to suggest there's a consensus out there that waterboarding is not torture is not in fact accurate.
L. CHENEY: No, I think it is accurate. There were three people who were waterboarded. And two of those people are people who gave us incredibly important and useful information, information that saved American lives after they were waterboarded. Both Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah.
And I would just refer your viewers to the really important op-ed piece that Mike Hayden and Attorney General Mukasey wrote laying out why this program worked, why it was effective and what damage has now been done to our national security by releasing the tactics of this program (ph).
O'DONNELL: Well, the current director of the national intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, has said this about those particular memos, he says this, quote, "the information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances. But there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means."
We have a full screen of this - no, let me, I want to put this full screen up, because this is very important. Could we please get this up on the screen?
L. CHENEY: It is important, Norah, but let me comment to that.
O'DONNELL: The bottom line - the bottom line is that these techniques have hurt our image around the world.
L. CHENEY: Norah, I'm sure you know...
(CROSSTALK)
O'DONNELL: ... director says that the damage that has done has far outweighed any information that was gleaned. And in fact, there is a disagreement about whether other tactics other than waterboarding could have gotten valuable information.
L. CHENEY: Norah, I'm sure you know that actually the first statement that DNI Blair put out internally acknowledged the incredible effectiveness of these programs and acknowledged that very important intelligence had been gained. And that it was only after the White House got a hold of the statement, edited the statement, censored it I would say, and put it out publicly that his language changed.
So I think this is another instance where people need to take a very close look at the fact you've had four former CIA directors talk about how effective this program is and why memos should not have been released, and the fact that DNI Blair changed his assessment of the program should raise some questions in people's minds.
O'DONNELL: I want to get back again - we can debate this, but I want to get back to specifically, what role the vice president had in directing lawyers to authorize these memos. Was it from the vice president's office, Dick Cheney, who said to those men -- John Hugh (ph), Jay Bibby (ph)- we need to come up with a way to interrogate these al Qaeda suspects after 9/11? Why doesn't he own up to the fact that he was the prime mover behind that?
L. CHENEY: Norah, there was no direction of lawyers from the vice president. That's not how this process worked. And I think that you can look at exactly how the process worked, which is, the CIA said we have Abu Zubaydah and we think he's got important information that further attacks are imminent and therefore, we need to know what we can do.
And the National Security Council met and discussed this. This is actually all laid out in Senator Rockefeller's timeline, which doesn't say what you're alleging that it says, which makes clear that the questions laid out to OlC were, what's possible and when. And if you've read the memos, in fact, that were released, you'll see that they were very, very careful in laying out exactly what could be done and for exactly how long.
So the notion...
O'DONNELL: Well, let me put that up on the screen, because we do have that and that's the first full screen that I was going to get to, which is the Cheney and Rice signed off on these interrogations. Very first graphic...
(CROSSTALK)
L. CHENEY: But Norah, what you're doing is reading a headline - but Norah, you're reading a headline from an A.P. story or McClatchy story. That's not what the document itself says.
Now, I think it's very important, however, to be clear...
O'DONNELL: The Senate Intelligence lays out that in those initial meetings were the vice president..
L. CHENEY: Absolutely.
O'DONNELL: ... the national security adviser...
L. CHENEY: That's absolutely right.
O'DONNELL: ... Powell, and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld were not in those initial meetings. So if those were that small group of people, why won't you say that the vice president was one of the prime movers in..
(CROSSTALK)
L. CHENEY: There's no question that the vice president of the United States supported the program, as did the national security adviser, as did the secretary of state, as did the attorney general, as did the entire National Security Council. There is nobody who has been clearer about being out there saying this is a good program, this saved American lives than the vice president. So there's nothing about owning up here, because this was a good program and people are very proud of what we've accomplished.
Now setting aside that, what you're doing is reading headlines and talking about direction of lawyers, which is a very different thing. And there's no assertion that that's what went on. The lawyers' opinions were sought in order to make sure that the program that the CIA ran stayed within the law. And the lawyers did a very responsible and professional job of laying out exactly what were the limits of how far we could go. And that is precisely what makes it so damaging that these memos have now been released.
O'DONNELL: Listen to yourself - listen to yourself, Liz, "how far we could go."
L. CHENEY: That's right.
O'DONNELL: How far could we go with detainees. I mean, how far...
L. CHENEY: Torture them in order to get information?
O'DONNELL: How far - no.
L. CHENEY: For how many minutes you could ask them certain kind of questions. How many...
(CROSSTALK)
L. CHENEY: I'm sorry, it's very, very important point.
O'DONNELL: It's a very important point.
L. CHENEY: It is a very important point.
O'DONNELL: The Geneva Convention were established...
L. CHENEY: Norah, there is nothing...
O'DONNELL: ... to protect our men and women in the military. So that America would be a beacon in the world so when our men and women are captured overseas that they would not be tortured. We would never want our people to...
L. CHENEY: Norah, are you going to give me a chance to answer your question?
O'DONNELL: Let me finish my point.
L. CHENEY: I get your point, Norah, but the point is - no, Norah, wait a second...
(CROSSTALK)
O'DONNELL: ... America no longer cares about torture?
L. CHENEY: That's not what the world is hearing, Norah. First of all...
(CROSSTALK)
O'DONNELL: .. and if gets valuable information, then OK, we're for it. Is that the message they send?
L. CHENEY: Norah, that may be what you're saying, but that's not what I'm saying.
O'DONNELL: OK.
L. CHENEY: What I'm saying that is there were a series of tactics, a series of techniques that had all been done to our own people. We did not torture our own people, these techniques are not torture. The memos laid out...
O'DONNELL: Did we torture other people?
L. CHENEY: No.
O'DONNELL: You just said, we did not torture our own people.
L. CHENEY: Therefore, the tactics are not torture. We did not torture. The memos laid out the extent of exactly how far we could go before it would become torture, because it was important we not cross that line into torture.
As General Hayden and Attorney General Mukasey laid out, the problem is that now we've said to our enemies, look, this is exactly how far we're g going to go. So our enemies, who we know read this stuff online, will now train to be able to withstand that.
Now, setting that aside, this argument about the Geneva Conventions, in terms of the - you know, this idea that somehow al Qaeda abides by the Geneva Conventions. If al Qaeda captures an American, they cut his head off. So I think it's very important for us to sort of take a step back from the emotion of this and say we needed to be able to get evidence about imminent attacks.
We knew these guys had information, the information that was provided saved American lives, and the techniques were not torture. And I think it's important for the American people to be able to see the entire argument laid out.
O'DONNELL: OK. Liz Cheney, stay with us, because we're going to have much more not only about these particular harsh interrogation memos that some people are calling torture memos, whether the vice president will participate, will testify before a truth commission, and the future of the Republican Party. We've got a lot more coming up right after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The world outside there, both our friends and our foes, will be quick to take advantage of a situation if they think they're dealing with a weak president or one who's not going to stand up and aggressively defend America's interests.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'DONNELL: Back with us is Liz Cheney, she, of course, the former deputy assistant secretary of state during the Bush administration and the daughter of the former vice president, Dick Cheney.
All right, Liz, did the vice president just call the president a weak president?
L. CHENEY: I think that he is concerned that some of the things that we've seen President Obama do, particularly on his overseas trip, in terms of not taking the opportunity to stand up and defend America when Daniel Ortega delivers a 50-minute screed against the United States...
O'DONNELL: Is that really appropriate, though, to call the current sitting president weak?
L. CHENEY: I think what he said is you begin to look weak and there's a danger if our enemies think we are weak. I think it's important to be very precise about what he said.
But I there's a real concern. I mean the message that we saw coming out of the last few foreign trips, you know, set aside republican and democrat, as an American, it concerns me when I've got a president who doesn't stand up and say, wait a minute. You know, I'm going to defend the United States of America because we are the beacon of hope for people all around the world.
O'DONNELL: He didn't said he wasn't going to defend America.
L. CHENEY: He didn't do it though, Norah. He didn't do it. He stood up after Ortega attacked the nation, attacked our policies for the last 40 years, and President Obama said, well, look I was only three months old.
Now, you know, that's not the kind of strong defense of the nation that I'd like to see.
O'DONNELL: Let me read to you what the former president, George W.
Bush, said on March 17th in Calgary. He said, quote, "I'm not going to spend my time criticizing him," talking about President Obama. "There are plenty of critics in the arena. He deserves my silence."
So Liz, what are you doing here? What's the vice president doing?
L. CHENEY: Well, the vice president thinks it's very important when you see the country begin to go down paths that are concerning and dangerous, and when you see the current administration making decisions that really do have the potential to make us less safe, in those circumstances, I would say the vice president doesn't' think that there's an obligation to be silent. In fact, I think he believes the opposite, which is that there's an obligation to stand up and say, wait a second. You know, there are important reasons why we put policies in place. They clearly kept us safe for seven years.
And it's very important as this administration now begins to dismantle some of those things, that the public, you know, understand and have the ability to have a debate about what direction we're going to go in.
O'DONNELL: The latest former vice president's approval ratings, Cheney, favorable, 21 percent, unfavorable 58 percent.
Is it possible that the American people have already made a judgment about whose right on this issue? They voted for change, they don't agree with your point of view, with your father's point of view?
L. CHENEY: You know, I think - obviously, they voted for change. I think there are lot of reasons why the republicans lost this election. I do think that the Republican Party needs to do some rebuilding.
But I think that all of that is domestic politics and poll numbers.
And I think that we are at a crossroads as a nation. We're at a moment where we can either remember that we're at war and remember that there are people out there who really would like to do us great damage and great harm and keep those policies in place that have kept us safe, or we go back to treating this like a law enforcement matter.
And I think when you're dealing with issues that are of that grave importance, spending a lot of time looking at poll numbers is irresponsible.
O'DONNELL: Well, the former vice president is now calling the sitting vice president essentially a weak president. That he's concerned he's going -- he said essentially said he's worried that he's no longer going to ask terrorists tough questions, which I'm sure our men and women are going to ask terrorists tough questions.
L. CHENEY: The question is, Norah....
(CROSSTALK)
O'DONNELL: ... answer the questions, I think that's the question.
(CROSSTALK)
O'DONNELL: ... did Vice President Cheney get permission from President Bush to speak out like this?
L. CHENEY: He doesn't need permission. But we were just watching...
O'DONNELL: Do they talk regularly?
L. CHENEY: They do.
But let me say one thing. We were just watching Attorney General Holder, and he made a very important point. He talked about the task forces that have been set up to review interrogation techniques. And this is one of the things that's so concerning about the release of these legal memos and it's another thing General Hayden points out.
President Obama said to his National Security Council, you tell me whether or not the tactics in the Army Field Manual are sufficient and you report back to me about whether those are sufficient to protection the nation.
And they haven't reported back yet. That is underway. That review is underway. And in the meantime, we have released the information about what other tactics are.
So it's really a situation where there's, you know, the president has not only tied his own hands, but he's tied potentially the hands of all future presidents by putting this material out before he himself even knew whether his task force was going to tell him, yes, you need those tactics.
O'DONNELL: Well, the Senate Armed Services Committee came out with a report yesterday. And the chairman of that committee, Carl Levin, said essentially, there's a direct link between what happened in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. That these types of interrogation practices led to what we saw at Abu Ghraib. And I think there's been a pretty general agreement across the world that what happened at Abu Ghraib was despicable.
L. CHENEY: Absolutely what happened at Abu Ghraib is despicable. What Senator Levin is saying and the report that you've mentioned, clearly you've heard republican members of Congress and republican senators on TV all day today pointing out that that was a partisan report.
So, Abu Ghraib was despicable, the people that did those things are being prosecuted and have been prosecuted and punished. That is not the CIA interrogation program. That was a situation in which people were doing things that were clearly against the law and they shouldn't have been doing. And it's a very convenient thing for, you know, democrats in Congress and people who are trying to sort of make partisan attacks here to point Abu Ghraib. I think we all should be able to say we agree that was a crime and that was despicable.
And that's not part of this current debate.
O'DONNELL: Well, the question is whether that led - some of those -- opening the door to those harsh interrogation tactics led to a misunderstanding that happened at Abu Ghraib.
We're going to have much more with Liz Cheney...
L. CHENEY: But I don't think there's any evidence that it did, by the way.
O'DONNELL: All right, when we come back, more with Liz Cheney, including what Megan McCain had to say to day about the former vice president.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O'DONNELL: And we are back with Liz Cheney.
And Liz, I want to play for you something that Megan McCain, who of course is the daughter of John McCain, was co-hosting on "The View" this morning and she had some tough words for your father, the former vice president.
Let's listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MEGAN MCCAIN, THE VIEW: The DNC just did an ad. And it has Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich and Dick Cheney as the new faces of the Republican Party...
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh my God, how scary.
MCCAIN: Well, I mean, it's hard people like me that really want new energy and new blood when they - it's very unprecedented for someone like Karl Rove or Dick Cheney to be criticizing the president. It's very unprecedented a former vice president, you know, obviously Karl Rove - and I just - you know, my big criticism is just, you had your eight years, go away.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
O'DONNELL: You have a reaction to that?
L. CHENEY: Look I disagree with her. But I think it's great to have young people actively engaged in politics. And I think that one of the things that we're seeing that's, I think, is fascinating, in the early months of this administration, something that I thought would take longer, frankly. And I think you're seeing people around the country, young people in particular, look at those tea parties we had a couple of weeks ago, people coming out just saying, wait a second here. There are a lot of things that we love about this nation and we don't want to see those things take away.
So I think that, you know, it's terrific to have people engaged in the process. I would encourage more people to get engaged and I think it's a good thing for the party.
O'DONNELL: Do you think Sarah Palin is the future of the Republican Party?
L. CHENEY: I think that Sarah Palin's terrific. I think that there are a lot of young, you know, leaders out there that we see, people in Congress. I'm a big fan of Adam Putnam, who I hope will one day run for governor of Florida. People like Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan. You know, we've got a lot of very smart, very talented, young members of Congress, some governors out there as well, who I really do think represent, you know, where the party will go in the future.
O'DONNELL: And given that 90 percent of John McCain's voters were white in this past election, do you acknowledge your party has a long way to go when it comes to minorities and reaching out to younger people, too?
L. CHENEY: I do think we have a lot to do. And I think that the Obama campaign was a masterful campaign. And I think the new techniques that they set out and that they implemented are ones that we need to be studying closely and learning from and stealing the next time around.
O'DONNELL: All right, Liz Cheney, thank you so much for joining us
here on MNSBC.
L. CHENEY: Thanks, Norah. Great to be here.
aside from all the factual errors that were elucidated by the follow-up which you ignore, why should her defense of her daddy even be news? a loyal daughter-just lovely but utterly without merit as an informed, much less impartial, interviewee. cnn is too full of ideologues posing as pundits and interviewers unwilling or unable to ask the right questions.
Liz Cheney had her facts and kept her composure. First time I've seen her and am very impressed.
O'Donnell could not trip her up and actually started to play the emotional card when Cheney would not accept O'Donnells many false premises.
Loved it.
This idea that the world has an opinion is specous on its face. Most of the world can't even read and are preoccupied with their own affairs.
I do think that we are coming to see that Obama's world is not the free world we have been associating with. We have made many hard choices in defense of freedom. Waterboarding 3 terrorists is not high up on that list which is imprinted on the hearts of those we have defended and those waiting in their gulags.
Listen to youself Nora, you should lined up against a wall and shot.
Liz Cheney for president in 2012....
Is MSNBC run by George Soros too?
Cheney: 1, O'Donnell: 0
Who doesn't think that the MSM is grossly biased? Goodness, it's like they're on the DNC's payroll.
MSNBC is full of a bunch of mental midgets. The interviewer needs to be spoon fed an answer before she could process the point. Unbelievable. Liz Cheney 2012.
And now we see why MSNBC is such a joke. Liz Cheney was the adult in the room sitting across from a childish liberal who had nothing but weak emotional feelings as her " defense ".
Torture? I think not.
MSNBC...now that is torture.
OMG, what a jackass that thing they call Norah O'Donnell is! "The Geneva conventions were established so the U.S. could be a beacon" - holy Hannah, go back to school and try to actually learn something, O'Donnell you moron, and try learning how to discuss something based on some facts.
It's not pretty when a little girl gets in a tussle with a mature woman. It is , however, necessary for all to see. Thomas Sowell outlined the concept of "Cosmic Justice" that the Left seeks to impose on a world that, for at least the last century, has shown them to be naive children with a Howard Zinn education. The sort of people who might send a bust of Winston Churchill back to Britain while providing Rosa Brooks a national security clearance. The first comment by sue shows the depth of the Left's understanding and the adolescence of their argument techniques. It also shows, when their foes show strength, they will turn on their own. Nice bunch. How lucky we are to have them running the government in such a perilous era. Isn't Nora pretty though.
Kudos to Liz Cheney. Finally, an articulate, clear and unapolegetic Republican. Are there any others?
Is SERE training against the Geneva Conventions Norah? When our servicemen are waterboarded is that or is that not torture Norah? I would really like to hear those saying we "tortured" terrorists argue that. If they think it is torture, then at least we know where they're coming from, but then I'd ask where they've been lo these many years, as thousands of serviceman have had their rights violated lo these many years and the Geneva Convention has been routinely spat upon against US citizens.
I hear a lot of torture absolutists argue that servicemen "volunteered" to be waterboarded, and thus it's not torture. However, Christopher Hitchens and all the other people who wanted to try it out on camera "volunteered" to be waterboarded, and yet Chris Hitchens suggests that it is torture.Which negates the argument about "choice".
But it also underscores the point about how absurd this argument is. Would Hitchens agree to have his fingernails pulled out? Of course not. Would the Army force trainees to undergo fingernails being pulled out as part of their routine training? No. Because that is clearly torture. Then Waterboarding, while harsh, falls within the bounds of behavior that we can use on our servicemen and women as a routine to do something as banal as graduate a class. In fact, they'd argue that its necessary training.
So to put THAT waterboarding into context, if it doesn't rise to the level of torture there I don't have a problem with it if it's used in rare instances on a terrorist who is about to carry out operations that will potentially kill thousands of people in extremely horrific manners. Hell, even the terrorists who "volunteer" to martyr themselves are volunteering to undergo something worse for themeselves than waterboarding, namely killing themselves.So it's kind of hard for me to justify the idea that its wrong to waterboard them because they didn't volunteer to be waterboarded. If we capture them and interrogate them, their personal choices are not exactly relevant are they.
And lets stipulate, that enhanced techniques shouldn't be used in most cases. They are ENHANCED TECHNIQUES only to be used when the basic techniques have failed and their is a need to get information to save people or prevent attacks that are going to occur or, for example, if there is a high level target like KSM who definitively knows about the ins and outs of Al Qaeda, and all of its plots and its operatives.
Norah needs to explain to us, when there is intel of an attack or a high level target is captured who can provide info about said attacks or other operatives in his organization that have killed or will kill US citizens or have someone captured and is going to chop off their head (like Nick Berg for example) and traditional interrogations don't actually get information, what does Norah propose we do? Let the attack go forward? Let Nick Berg get his head chopped off? Because we can't even do to terrorists what we do routinely in SERE traing to our own people? That's here idea of being a shining beacon?
Before invading Afghanistan I heard a lot of liberals suggest we should instead have assassinated OBL. We hear that Clinton was trying to assassinate him but never got a good shot. But, I thought assassination was wrong!What about our acting like a shining beacon for the world? What about the Geneva Conventions and all that faux outrage.
Most people, would argue that they were against assassinations in general, and that assassinations are generally wrong, and shouldn't be practiced, BUT would make an exception in the cases of someone like OBL. And that's the exact same moral calculus that is being used for waterboarding. And incidentally, Obama made the exact same calculus when the navy shot the pirates holding the navy captain hostage, and made the exact same type of moral calculus when he recently bombed Pakistan to kill some Taliban soldiers (but also killed some civilians). What the hell is the difference? Seriously.
Liz was the Heavyweight Champion of the World and Norah was a bantamweight amateur in her frist fight,totaly outclassed .
"Isn't Nora pretty though."
And vacuous too. Liz Cheney needs to be on point for this. Get her on every talk show and let her have at the so-called pundits. I'd like to see her rip Bob Beckel a new one.
Bravo Liz! By far the best, most cogent defense of this important program to date. Nora didn't stand a chance. When does an interviewer interrupt the subject of the interview to state: "Let me finish MY point."
FINALLY! Someone on the right who doesn't just accept the questioner's premise and respond. She simply wouldn't accept O'Donnell's attempts to frame the argument. This should be a primer for how to respond to these types of questions.
Nora jumped all over Liz when she said that the government and military were interested in learning just how far they could go without crossing the line into torture. Of course Nora herself indicates there is a line because she makes the accusation that it was crossed, but criticizes the government and military for trying to find out just where that line is.
It's pretty clear all these people want is Bush and Cheney's heads on a platter and will do anything to make it happen. Obama is the leader of this game.
A side benefit of this strategy will be if it also takes down certain top democrats in Congress or threatens them sufficiently so there will be absolutely no opposition to what Obama wants to do.
After that spanking when do you think Norah O. will have Liz back on her show again?
What a pleasure to see someone explain these "torture" issues with cogent arguments. And what do we get from Norah? Preconceived notions and feigned indignity. All emotion, no thought, all the time!
Put me in the "Liz Cheney for 2012" camp! What a thoughtful, fact-based, mature presentation! She did indeed make that Nora person look like a whiny three year old...
O'Donnell comes across like a dutiful apparatchik. Pathetic.
It is so encouraging to see all the positive comments about Liz Cheney's defense of the interrogation methods. She was right on the mark with every point, and spanked the mindless liberal Nora like a red headed step child.
The left is so far off base on this issue (and all other issues) and is really threatening our nation with their non stop attacks on the Bush administration. They have no idea the damage they are doing, and have already done.
SERE training offers a rigorous sampler of torture techniques American soldiers may face if captured by the BAD guys..Not intended as a sampler of things Americans would use on our Prisoners of War. General Hayden, who looks like the gestapo guy in Raiders of the Lost Ark,needs to hold his line that all is well lest he admit to some monstrous behavior that could place him in the company of our favorite Military felon Ollie North..Liz Cheney, liar,or delusional daddy's girl take your pick..
Now, if only Bush could have articulated as well.
I know know what the definition of true torture is! NORAH O'DONNELL! Good googamooga! Why in the world would that PMSing heifer with her obvious political bias be allowed to interview ANYONE? She looked like she was going to attack Ms. Cheney and start gnawing on her arm! I don't really give a rip about this issue, myself, I think they all should be shot on the battlefield. Problem solved.
city mike, you miss the point, but I'm sure that's by design, your anti Bush bias is evident in your "daddy's girl" comment.
We do not "torture" our Special Operational military members...never, no way, no how. They are occasionally waterboarded, pushed around, kept awake, kept cold, kept hungry, dehydrated, over hydrated, and psychologicly abused. None of that is torture or else it would be ILLEGAL.
BDS has devoured your ability to reason. Your comments are closer to torture than anything the head lopping off terrorists went through
You go Liz...
you are surly your fathers daughter...great job,
Norah Oddonell is just another Liberal out to "get the Bushes" she has been at it for 8 years....
If waterboarding works...use it...
This interview was all about NORA ODONNEL...if she would have shut her yap just once and let Ms Cheney defend her words, the interview would have been more useful.
I am for the use of water boarding...yeah, I know, I like my country and its' people safe, and if getting the info from those animals takes pulling out the finger nails, then let it begin.
Nora O'Donnell should be fired!
ODonnel got her butt kicked but is too dumb to realize it.
Since when do "journalists" debate? I thought they were supposed to ask questions, get answers.?
Oh, yeah, I forgot, people choose "journalism" to major in college because (1) they have an agenda and political point of view to advance, and (2) they dont have to take math.
"journalists" are not certified, they just have jobs, they are not professionals, they are hacks.
It's people like Nora and all the other lefty's who are ruining our country from the inside out. They have so much hate spewing from their tongues. I wonder how they can sleep at night...
And Liz..YOU GO GIRL !!!!You whupped her tongue.
Sandy OCALA,FL
This video clip cuts out right before O'Donnell started frothing, writhing and screaming, "I want you to admit you're guilty!!" over and over again.
-----------
Those who keep bringing up the GC, A) first need to determine what the status is for KSM etc, whether in Cuba or Bagram to B) determine which clause in the GC applies to them and C) provide proof to AQ's contracting, signatory status to the GC, and adherence since then.
Me thinks Nora wanted to waterboard Liz...
Norah works for that sick outfit, MSNBC, so she's
naturally going to act like an attack dog on any subject related to the Bush administration. There is no reasonable rationale behind their attacks, but MSNBC and their allies know they must continue to attack Mr. Bush and his administration...or the people of this nation will cease to be distracted by the Potemkin now in the White House. Then they will realize the grave danger we're in, brought on by the bumbling machinations of the current gang of ex-lobbyists, tax-evaders and all-around incompetents.
All that said, Ms. Cheney is 100% correct in her
position, just as the former Vice President is
100% correct in his evaluation of the consequences
of the treasonous actions of the current administration.
What a breath of fresh air to see and hear Liz Cheney talk with such knowledge of the facts compared to her "interviewer" who just wanted to through at her the memorized talking points. You go Liz! The only good point for Nora is that she didn't read them from a teleprompter. Where will all these liberal twits hide if we are ever assaulted like we were in 9-11?
Bah to those who refer to Ms. Cheney- an accomplished professional- as "daddy's girl". If she were my daughter I would be proud to see what she made of herself in service to the Nation.
All of this MSM blather will be a moot point once we are attacked again and they squeal "How could this have happened?!?!?!?!??!" Just like they did on 9/11.
How many of these twits were spawned and into the mainstream just during the Bush Presidency? Have any of these macaroons even lived outside of Post 9/11 American Left cynicism? All they know is the junk food agenda of attack bush set for them by Soros and company.
Well, it is about to get much tougher as they see their responsibility to actually report the economic carnage that is going to escalate worldwide. It is going to be much tougher as they will be FORCED to report the DNC-Soetoro-Soros Party Line while watching all the "volunteers" in Soetoro's new program find that they are really going to be put in uniform once it dawns on the USG that we are not finished fighting YET!
And these pantywaist sexualites in the media are going to choke on this stuff....because the lie will wear thin once it affects their families, their loved ones, and not just be some "speak out" in a college classroom that is their political life en toto.
These ass clowns not only dominate in the media--- they dominate the universities, the PTA's, the homeowners associations, etc etc etc....no facts, just slogans and the "knowing looks" that "hey this is just an ignorant conservative and we KNOW what he is all about.
Thanks for speaking FOR ME Ms. Cheney. God Bless. Call Sarah Palin and set the ticket. The Lefties wanna see real woman power? I think they are gonna get a tast in 2012.
Bear1909 out.
Should one laugh or cry after reading outré and characteristically ignorant and bigoted remarks from leftists? One wishes them well and hope they will heal and recover.
Liz Cheney showed remarkable intelligence. She deftly dealt with challenges, e.g., responding graciously after hearing Megan McCain. It is plain that her posting in the Bush Administration had zero to do with nepotism--few complained about Robert Kennedy as Attorney General on that score--but everything to do with her outstanding ability. She might not be a candidate for political office, but could be a welcome adviser to some and a distinguished member of an Administration better than the present or preceding Administrations. Never give up hope.
Liz Cheney is an outstanding speaker, and an extraordinary advocate for what she believes in, as well as being tactful when speaking of others.
This wasn't Couric v. Palin by any stretch, and Norah seems to have bitten off more than she could chew.
In fact, there may be none in the media with the skills to rattle Ms. Cheney, so I would guess that the number of future invitations to this type of interview will decline, as producers of shows book less articulate guests, or at least those guests who have shown themselves poorly in the past.
It's either that or kevlar underwear for the interviewers, so the bite marks on their asses won't leave scars.
Don't those who call water boarding torture know what other countries who have practiced torture on Americans have done to them? Be real. There is no comparison. It now will be illegal for our children - of whatever age - to playfully push their friends off the edge of the pool, lake, dock. No more will they be allowed to dive under water to yank their friends' feet from under them. It will also destroy pages of "foreplay" in steamy romantic novels when the hero tries to dunk the heroine prior to a hot scene. Same as in movies and TV. No more splashing water into someone's face. It's now considered "torture" by those who wish to discredit Bush. We've has enough "Sorosis" of the brain. George got his money worth in his efforts to make our country into another socialistic one.
Liz did well. Nora not. She played her script well but came off showing a lack of knowledge - rude, mean spirited, and most importantly - without any wish to give a fair and balanced interview. Her network is failing - perhaps the American public is smarter than they think and don't want too be brainwashed.
If there was a picture in Wikipedia next to their entry of "Braindead" it would be of Norah O'Donnell
O'Donnell got owned, that was awesome. Very articulate
I have always greatly admired Dick and Lynne Cheney. Now I am astounded that they raised such smart, articulate daughters. WOW! As a parent, I am duly impressed. That my children should be as whip-smart and articulate as Liz Cheney.
Cheney/Palin 2012.
None of it matters, nobody wataches msnbc
Liz took Norah to school on the issue. It's funny how facts can over trump politicaly motivated Headlines. Why is it that losers try to overtalk winners with facts? From this interview it shows that facts win every time. Let's release all the memos on this issue and see the rest of the liars caught with their botox down. What comes first being a liar or becoming a politician? How about a poll on this Q. Thanks. Great reporting,
Liz Cheney did an excellent interview and response. As much as I like Nora, she was out of line with her questions / cometary
I'll bet Cheney is the last person Nora interviews without a frontal lobotomy.
Norah....Norah what a moron. Is this an example of professional reporting???? if she had her way she would form a possy to hang Mr Cheney who's service to this country has been examplary. It is the Norah of this world that if given their misdirected emotions would deal a mortal wound to the America that we love.Left Winger par excellence the same fanatic that have in history given support to the like of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and people of the same ilk.Go Home Norah and some babies!!!!!! can you?????
Norah....Norah what a moron. Is this an example of professional reporting???? if she had her way she would form a possy to hang Mr Cheney who's service to this country has been examplary. It is the Norah of this world that if given their misdirected emotions would deal a mortal wound to the America that we love.Left Winger par excellence the same fanatic that have in history given support to the like of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin and people of the same ilk.Go Home Norah have some babies!!!!!! can you?????
How far will the Obama administration go to make themselves look good at the expense of the country, of our military, and citizens like us??? I'm so sick and tired of this adolescent pandering to far left wackos in this country who will NEVER be satisfied. Now the Obomots plan to release the photos of "torture" that has been repeatedly explained as a means to get GUILTY murders to spill what they know to save American lives. Another pathetic attempt to get the far left squawking again, and the rest of the country's adults will recognize the foolish consequences of this partisan behavior. We have to wonder...is anyone in the D party mature enough to see the damage they are doing?
Does anyone other than the nuts like MSMBC, ABC, CBS give a rats ass what the world thinks of us. Where were are all the pompous jerks when China, Cuba, Iran and Venezula really torture to DEATH their own people just because they disagree with the government. These people live in a world without reason or common sense. I think ONE American life is worth at least a thousand water boardings.
what's so troubling is the left wants to treat our enemy better than our troops. terrorist are willing to blow themselves up, kill you, me, and everybody in America and we're worrying about giving them a "bath". but lets step back and look at the real agenda. this administration has fundamentally redefined terrorist from those that have declared war on America and it's safety to those that oppose Obama and his Islamic Fascism views. Janet Napolitanos memo uses the word terrorist for vets,pro-life,and traditional marriage advocates but not those that call us the "great Satan". this admin.is clearly more concerned about image than protection. Boy do I miss Bush!!!
Liz is deafinately a chip off the old block. She is as articulate as her dad. I see big things for her in the future. I would like to see her on every news program. Go gettem Liz!
Bring back Cronkite I say! What ever happened to honest, non-biased journalism? . . reporting only the facts and leaving out personal emotion, and biases? It used to be if I wanted a story I could pick up one of my grand daughters books; now all I have to do is turn on msnbc to hear "I don't like green eggs and ham. I don't like them sam i am!" Who cares what journalists thinks? When I watch the news I am interested in what I think. If I wanted to watch what entertainers thought I would watch E. I certainly don't want anyone thinking for me when it comes to me making informed, critical decisions, especially when they are entering an argument half cocked, unarmed with all the facts and more importantly not caring and unopened to what the facts really are... interested in their own personal agenda.
Hopefully (and as is evidenced by the ratings, very probable) this kind of sensationalism, censored, skewed reporting will soon go with the corruption on the hill... out the door, by gones, the people have spoken.
Quite frankly this reporter should put on the bikini to get the full attention of what she portrays as her real desires; obviously she is in it for ratings and not reporting; when are these folks going to learn? people who watch the news every day, people who keep coming back everyday do so to be accurately informed not entertained (drama folks watch oprah and springer and tivo around the facts of life.) Wanting to be informed I wanted to hear what Cheney had to say. I wanted to hear her side of the facts. I grew annoyed by the interviewer (i cannot call her a reporter) for constantly talking over her, pushing the conversation in her direction instead of letting the facts of the interview come out. Why did she even bother to have Chaney on if she could have cared less what she had to say? One more time, being right is more important than doing the right thing. O'Donnell looked like an idiot if you ask me.
O'Donnal is just another communist pig just like her boss Obama the king communist pig. You had better start looking at him that way. He is going to kill America if you all let him.
Brava for Ms. Cheney! As usual, the reporter is so busy grandstanding, and trying to get her points across, she does not let the information out from the person who may actually have facts! I thought journalists were supposed to report the news, NOT MAKE IT! It would be prudent if MSNBC learned that and attempted to actually do that! Well, it was just a thought! Wake up people! It is your national security, your freedoms at stake. And ps, to the liberal left biased (Uber) media, your freedoms as well.
Hot damn tamale Charlie! What a strong and composed woman that Liz Cheney is. More please-
Liz Cheney is just awesome!
This is just another example of the liberal, one-sided media only reporting one side of the story. Liz Cheney should be commended for her diligence against such a "reporter" (and I use that word lightly) only trying to make the last administration look bad. It is really scary that our media are allowed to get away with such scare tactics aimed at the American people. Shame on you Ms. O'Donnell!
Excellent! Running mate for Sarah Palin in 2012. Very impressive lady.
loved the way she played the race card: is it ok to point out that black voters voted in a highly racist way? Or is it just ok to imply that 90% of voters fro McCain were white. What an ass. Ever notice how people who can't win an argument start impying racism? Or is it only folks who have sex with dogs? Oops, was that name-calling. No worse than screaming racist, if you ask me.
Hello RNC... why have you been keeping this lady a secret? Put her out there more. Brilliant!
Bill B
Longwood, FL
The memos specifically changed the definition of torture, or moved the line back to a point where they could legally say what they were doing wasn't torture. This made a mockery of the principles of the United States and is an insult to the intelligence and morality of the people of the United States of America. That very point is why Ms. Cheney can sit there and say, "we didn't torture" when it is clear that we did. Can't these other readers see through Cheney's bullsh**? Wake up, people.
We, out west never get asked about "political aspirations in the D.C. arena", who cares? When we send troopers off to battle, like Dick and Liz Cheney, we know they will get the job done. By in large, you can take that one all the way to the bank.
Liz Cheney and Sarah Palin are my choice if anything is left to call the United States of America!
p.s. By the way, send Nora out for the holidays. She is not quite as pretty as my two year old "buckskin" but, I am betting she will not have to ask for help to put her saddle on!
Even at the dimly lit tree they call NBC, Nora is not one of their brightest lights.
When you're trying to defend torture on the basis of the value of the information it gathers, then you've already lost the argument, and perhaps lost your soul.
It is so sad to see people devolving to arguments like "The ends justify the means", or "We declared it to be legal before we did it, therefore it wasn't illegal."
The ends DO NOT justify the means. (In law, I think that leaves you open to a beatdown by one of the "dirty hands" arguments.)
Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's right. (I'm sure everyone here can thing of at least one or two examples.)
Even bad methods work sometimes; doesn't mean you should make a habit of it.