Chuck Todd And Glenn Greenwald Debate Torture And The Media

I've been remiss in not following up on the podcast discussion that Salon's Glenn Greenwald and MSNBC's Chuck Todd gave yesterday, that I previewed on these pages. I got a lot of emails from people who found the discussion to be really lively and valuable. I've only read the transcript myself, but I was really impressed at how engrossing and candid it was. Both men deserve big-time kudos for making this happen, and getting it done so quickly.

If you haven't listened to it by now, you can catch the podcast here, or peep the transcript by clicking here.

Folks know where I stand on the issue of torture and accountability -- including Glenn and Chuck-- so I'm not going to get into a prosecution of either argument. But I'll pull one part out:

GG: Let me ask you about that, then. If a president can find, as a president always will be able to find, some low-level functionary in the Justice Department -- a John Yoo -- to write a memo authorizing whatever it is the president wants to do, and to say that it's legal, then you think the president ought to be immune from prosecution whenever he breaks the law, as long as he has a permission slip from the Justice Department? I mean, that's the argument that's being made. Don't you think that's extremely dangerous?

CT: That could be dangerous, but let me tell you this: Is it healthy for our reputation around the world - and this I think is that we have TO do what other countries do more often than not, so-called democracies that struggle with their democracy, and sit there and always PUT the previous administration on trial - you don't think that we start having retributions on this going forward?

Look, I am no way excusing torture. I'm not excusing torture, and I bristle at the attack when it comes on this specific issue. But I think the political reality in this, and, I understand where you're coming from, you're just saying, just because something's politically tough doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. That's, I don't disagree with you from 30,000 feet. And that is an idealistic view of this thing. Then you have the realistic view of how this town works, and what would happen, and is it good for our reputation around the world if we're essentially putting on trial the previous administration? We would look at another country doing that, and say, geez, boy, this is--

GG: So what do you think happens - I think what has destroyed our reputation is announcing to the world that we tolerate torture, and telling the world we don't --

CT: We have elections, we also had an election where this was an issue. A new president, who came in there, and has said, we're not going to torture, we're going to do this, and we're going to do this--

GG: What do you think should happen when presidents--

CT: Is that not enough? Isn't that enough?

GG: When, generally, if I go out and rob a bank tomorrow, what happens to me is not that I lose an election. What happens is to me is that I go to prison.

All I can say is that if John Yoo wants to do me a solid, it'd be really cool of him to whip up some "Jason Is Allowed To Knock Over One Or Two Jewelry Stores" memos.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[rigmoten]

I like chuck Todd and wanted him on mtp instead of mr bushthumper, but he is wrong. If Iran tortured US soldiers and then held an election and had someone else that got elected and claimed immunity we would be furious! Glen beck would start screaming "get off my planet" and be calling for heads. A new guy in charge means nothing if he does nothing about laws being broken.

[Michaela1976]

I don't like him at all. I don't like Gregory either. Two Republicans ... both of them are conservatives.. no thanks.

[1Troubles]

correct-there is no difference between Todd abd Gregory
they both stink

[kindGSL]

You can add the whole Morning Joe crowd to that list.

[TheLibs]

Chuck Todd has shown his true bias since taking his current job. He is very obviously biased to the right & I no longer watch any program he is on.

[Michaela1976]

MSNBC has really gone to the gutter in making a number cruncher the White House Correspondent.

[Jinxykb]

I still like him. I just think he's wrong on this issue. I don't feel compelled to throw him under the bus because I disagree with him. He's still a smart, well-spoken guy, who is searching for the truth in politics. He just got this one wrong.

[TheLibs]

To each his/her own. I don't see this as being an isolated case. The more I watched him, the more I saw a clear agenda. But again, everybody sees things differently.

[sviolette]

This one is a pretty important one. He just got it wrong doesn't cut the mustard. He shouldn't be debating a subject that he has no knowledge of.

[dbushik]

I really don't think it's about right or left. It's about power and influence. Todd stands with establishment, and establishment doesn't want accountability. The tragic thing is that people like this don't even see what they are doing. The intention is not there, but the end results are plain as day.

Chuck, you are arguing in favor of lawlessness. If that isn't what you think you are doing, you really need to step back and re-evaluate.

[MTiffany]

Chuck arguing in favor of lawlessness? Surely you jest! That man of towering intellect, insight, and wit? He's just arguing in favor of whatever makes the best sound bite.

[Mikeeee]

Chuck Todd just confirmed for me that he's a dishonest man.

[ForwardtoYesterday]

I don't agree with what he said, but saying he's dishonest makes zero sense. In fact, he sets out the case against in a pretty straightforward manner.

Moreover, he didn't have to meet with Glenn Greenwald and took a rather extraordinary step in doing so. I'm truly surprised he reached out to him that way. Can you imagine Tim Russert or Peter Jennings doing that? They'd simply dismiss him as someone not part of the mainstream discussion. Again, I'm not a fan of what he said in this part of the discussion (I haven't seen the rest), but I think being willing to go toe to toe in a public way like that with someone as blunt and brutally intelligent as Greenwald places him miles above most of the mainstream reporting class.

Indeed, I wonder if this ever would have happened if Todd was not now a coworker of Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. Something has changed in the world, my friends.

[zenaby56]

I think President is taking the right approach. The Justice Department is the one who is supposed to prosecute. While I want accountability for Bush and the way that administration worked so systematically at destroying our country's integrity, constitution and more. President Obama has a mess he is cleaning up. A really big mess on so many fronts. For him to actively push for prosecution, it would undermine his ability to take on several of the issues he's working on right now, and it would be premature. In the mean time, the Justice Department is working at sorting some of this out. It takes time to unravel the tight ball of knots put in place by the Bushies. I would not be surprised if accountability doesn't start to be more forward late next year after some more specifics get uncovered.

[disbelief]

I agree! I know Obama is taking a lot of heat right now, but I think he is trying to get us back to how our government is supposed to work.

I don't want every President coming in running an agenda outside our system of government, even if it's an agenda I agree with.

Gay rights should go through the legislative branch and people should be demanding action from their Senators and Congressmen.

The DOJ should deal with Bush, Cheney, Yoo and torture.

We NEED to do these things the right way, the way the Founders set it up.

I wish people would see that Obama is a Constitutional lawyer and understands that our country needs to get back to the rule of law.

I don't want him to do what Bush did. I want us to get active in our government and affect change from us, the people.

People need to start holding their representatives accountable. Get on the phone, every day if you have to, and tell your reps what you want. They serve us, we don't serve them.

[gwithc]

Obama is breaking the back of all American by not prosecuting potential felons. There is no excuse!

When a law is broken it must be fixed with swift justice. If they keep showing us a double standard they won't last very long!

But don't forget, ALL of the 911 perpetrators still have not faced charges...and don't try to tell me about the "mastermind" and all of these minuscule people they threw into these temporary detention centers.

The game keeps going on and on and WE have paid and are paying the price!

[Michaela1976]

It's Eric Holders decision

[twilight druid]

Obama has weighed in. Holder's job is a lot easier with the backing of the president.

[JDM73]

No, Chuck. Saying "we're not going to torture" isn't nearly enough. The precedent has to be erased and the people responsible have to be punished.

[kindGSL]

The people responsible are still in positions of power.

[LemonMeringue]

Read the article on Panetta in a recent New Yorker magazine. (You can Google it.)

They are paralyzed by worry that it will not be fair to prosecute people who acted in good faith because of the Justice Dept. memos saying torture was legal. (Never mind a human being with a conscience could not have acted on that.)

They should sort this all out and cut deals with some of them, in return for information about the higher-ups who committed these crimes.

To do nothing is to let our nation rot from the inside, and their excuse is just lame.

[Michaela1976]

Give me a break.. These are adults. They know the laws in the CIA. MY mommy told me to is not an excuse.

[motu]

my mommy told me it's a sin to torture too.

[Lucky123]

Let me preface this by saying that I voted for Obama. Worked the phones at the local Dem office during the election. Had my signs, went to rallies, and celebrated like mad on election night and inauguration day. Now, if I had a chance to ask him a question, it would be similar to Glenn's last comment. "Mr. Obama, if I rob a bank, and am not caught in the act, would you consider the idea of a subsequent investigation pointless, because it would be 'looking back'?"

I've been trying to give him the benefit of the doubt on this, suspecting that he's waiting for just the right moment to strike. I tell people my theory is that he realizes the GOP is crumbling on it's own, and quickly losing power and supporters. So, he doesn't want to do anything as polarizing as repeal DADT, gay marriage or torture investigations, because doing so might be exactly what they need to reunite the party. He's waiting for them to be so weakened, that he can pass virtually anything he wants. But now I'm really beginning to wonder.

[dhfsfc]

Same.

[LemonMeringue]

Obama is wrong on this. If this administration does nothing the GOP will be back to do this again.

[MassInsanity]

As Glenn said, if you were president, wouldn't you want mandates still on the books that kept you above the law? Seems pretty convenient....

[kindGSL]

It is the test, like Tolkien's Ring of Power.

Will he destroy it and save the world? Or try to wield it, and have it destroy both him and us all?

How melodramatic! When literature leads politics...

Personally, I am rooting for a return to constitutional law over serial despotic monarchy.

[Michaela1976]

I think he wants to do health care first.

[disbelief]

His fellow Republicans were the ones that took Nixon down.

We have so many pressing issues right now Obama needs to focus on keeping our country from collapsing. I don't think people really realize how dangerous a position we are in right now.

The DOJ needs to deal with this. We need to get back to the rule of law.