Dick Cheney’s Everyone-Said-We-Could-Do-It Dodge

[ProSense]

Dick Cheney’s Everyone-Said-We-Could-Do-It Dodge

By Spencer Ackerman 12/22/08 10:49 AM

So Dick Cheney takes to Fox News and reiterates the administration’s longstanding claim that the leaders of Congress knew all about the illegal surveillance and torture programs.

We brought in the chairman and the ranking member, House and Senate, and briefed them a number of times up until — this was — be from late ‘01 up until ‘04 when there was additional controversy concerning the program.

I presided over the meeting. We briefed them on the program, and what we’d achieved, and how it worked, and asked them, “Should we continue the program?” They were unanimous, Republican and Democrat alike. All agreed — absolutely essential to continue the program.

First, Democratic leaders have repeatedly denied that they knew all there was to know about the surveillance program. In July 2003, Sen. Jay Rockefeller, then the Democratic vice-chairman on the intelligence committee, wrote a letter to Cheney explaining that he didn’t feel like he had sufficient information to conduct appropriate oversight. And it’s hardly surprising that Cheney would misrepresent this stuff, given his cavalier attitude toward the truth.

But still. Glenn Greenwald puts the pressure on Democratic leaders to further explain themselves, and rightly so. If there’s ever a solid argument for an independent commission into the illegal surveillance and torture programs, here it is: the public is owed a thorough accounting of what the administration did; what it told Congress; and what Congress approved.

But still still. Cheney might not be acting in good faith, but he’s nevertheless pointing to something barometrically significant. In Washington, the phrase “bipartisan” is supposed to cash out to something like “legal” or “wise” or “no longer controversial” or “kosher.” The Germans probably have a word that’s a more acceptable translation. In any event, that’s self-evidently foolish: lots of people can make mistakes and lots of people can make venal decisions, and it’s not a function of belonging to one political party or the other. Cheney doesn’t get off the hook if Nancy Pelosi is on it with him. Naturally, what I imagine Cheney’s doing is warning the Democrats off creating an independent commission into the abuses of the administration, lest it go after them too, but that’s all the more reason one should be created.

On edit: Maybe Cheney is just trying to confuse the public, you know, like they did on Iraq. If people believe he acted legally, calls for hearings will be seen as partisan.

[Frustratedlady]

1. We outnumber Cheney. He says he can do anything he wants?

We say he can't.

Majority rules.

[ProSense]

2. No, obviously Cheney has an audience. n/t

[Winterblues]

10. How is that theory working out for you anyway?

:shrug: what exactly have the Democrats stopped Cheney and Bush* from doing?

[mmonk]

11. Being bi-partisan.

No matter how much they are accepting of republican ways, they still don't get the approval from them.

[mmonk]

3. He didn't have to dodge. Impeachment was off the table.

[Dragonfli]

5. According to our speaker of the house, the Constitution is a mere recommendation.

It is entirely up to her whether high crimes and misdemeanors should be grounds for impeachment.
That silly oath is just for show and nostalgia.

If one wanted, one could choose to ignore a crime in advance and state so publicly.

Stop picking on her for choosing for herself if crimes can be forgiven.
She is just being nice and forgiving.

[mmonk]

6. The post-partisanship clause of the Constitution.

[ProSense]

7. He's dodging now.

Surely you don't believe the statute of limitations on Bush/Cheney crimes has run out?

[mmonk]

9. No, I don't.

You project positions on people alot. It's the I wasn't alone in this defense he is using. I will be pleasantly surprised if Democrats prosecute. I've been going by their actions thus far.

[Esra Star]

4. Will this variation on the Nuremberg defense work?

Time will tell.

[DemoTex]

8. Bingo! The Nuremburg Indictments are clear and to the point. Cheney understands.

Nuremburg Indictments

1. Conspiracy to Wage Aggressive War

2. Waging Aggressive War, or "Crimes Against Peace"

3. War Crimes

4. Crimes Against Humanity

Obviously Cheney realizes how his situation would have turned out if this were 1946. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice. However, I doubt if Herr Cheney will live long enough for that arc to touch him. The fact that he seems truly worried warms my heart on these long winter nights.

[ProSense]

12. Exactly.

The fact that he seems truly worried warms my heart on these long winter nights.