Condoleezza Rice was recently speaking at Stanford when students asked her an excellent question on waterboarding and torture. They have her answer on tape and it isn't pretty. Condi Rice absolutely pulls a Nixon.
Here are the relevant quotes:
"The president instructed us that nothing we would do would be outside of our obligations, legal obligations under the Convention Against Torture."
Nothing we would do? Nothing? As I ask in the video above, what would happen if the president authorized you to murder someone, would it still not be illegal?
Next up, Condoleezza Rice denies any personal responsibility:
"I didn't authorize anything. I conveyed the authorization of the administration to the agency, that they had policy authorization, subject to the Justice Department's clearance. That's what I did."
Oh I see, she just conveyed the authorization. And how is that different than giving the authorization?
By the way, lest we forget she "conveyed" the authorization for waterboarding, which has been considered torture and illegal under any and all treaties and laws of the United States. That is exactly why this is a legal hot potato that no one wants to get stuck holding at the end of the day. Here she pushes the blame on to two different entities - President Bush and the Justice Department.
Now, the final coup de grace - once the president authorized it, it became legal:
"The United States was told, we were told, nothing that violates our obligations under the Convention Against Torture, and so by definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Convention Against Torture." (emphasis added)
That is as close as you can get to Richard Nixon's infamous comment, "When the president does it, that means it is not illegal."
This is why I say these people don't understand the whole concept behind America. In our system of government, the president is not supposed to be above the law. He is not a king; his word is not the law. The president can violate the law and when he does, he is supposed to be held accountable. That is supposed to be one of the pillars of our democracy.
Look at what she said: "[B]y definition, if it was authorized by the president, it did not violate our obligations under the Convention Against Torture." Does that mean the president can authorize any kind of torture under the Convention Against Torture?
If someone doesn't do something about this dangerous idea it will do more damage than the torture itself. Yes, the torture damaged our reputation across the world, helped terrorists recruit fighters against us, endangered our soldiers and sullied the name of America. But if this precedent - that the president can authorize anything and make it legal "by definition" - is allowed to stand, then our whole form of government is in jeopardy.
A violation of the law is, of course, a big deal, especially on something this grave and important. This is not a jaywalking ticket. There were 34 suspected or confirmed homicides of detainees, some clearly due to torture. It does not get any more serious than this. But what is even worse is if you set the precedent that violations of the law like this will not have any consequences. That is bigger than the crime itself.
The precedent does more damage than the law breaking because it sets the new boundaries and rules for our government. It confirms what Rice and Nixon argue for: When the president does it, that means it is not illegal.
Allowing that idea to stand unchallenged does far more damage to the republic than any one crime committed by any one person (or the prosecution thereof), even if that person is the president.
UPDATE -- The Stanford student who taped this, Reyna Garcia, will join us for an interview on our show tonight at 7:20PM ET. One small upside for those of us who think that the people who "conveyed" the authorization for torture should be held responsible is that hopefully they'll be showered by questions like these wherever they go for the rest of their lives. The infamy has begun for them.
Waterboarding doco welcomes Condoleezza Rice back to Stanford ...
'Renditions save lives': Condoleezza Rice's full statement - Times ...
Condoleezza Rice is a highly intelligent and very well-educated person. The fact that she would mirror almost exactly the same words as Nixon knowing full well the weight of them concerns me greatly. Do a majority of republicans now agree with this statement? Is the Bush and Cheney disregard for the rule of law now the standard administration model for republican party? What happens the next time the republicans gain the White House? Unfortunately I think I already know the answer to all of these questions...
Alice in Wonderland was convinced that we can make words mean anything we want to. We can in Wonderland. That is why anybody can see through this farce. The question is how could the Bush Administration resort to such a foolish way of think. Cheney also was selective in description of his job. He could decide that if it was convenient he was part of the Executive Branch, but if not part of the Legislative Branch, or maybe he had his own special Department. True pathology, but so far they have gotten away with it except for almost destroying the Republican Party. The reason that they got off track so much is that it appears that none of them are lawyers and the ones they had were complete hacks. I am going to try this "Alice in Wonderland" defense if I even get pulled over for speeding. I am going to tell the police officer that my speedometer said I was only going 20 miles per hour so I cannot be guilty of speeding.
NOT!
Why was Clinton impeached?.
Or does the "When the President Does It, That Means It is Not Illegal" only apply to Republicans?
Condi certainly has looked around and taken notice of the fact that she is both Black and female. This gives her twice the chance of Rumsfield, Bush, Cheney or any of the authorizing attorneys to become the Bush administration scapegoat. If her signature is on any document (as the report indicates that it is), then that cooks her goose even faster.
Oh boy!
But thanx for pointing that out. I guess.
BTW, I try to make a point to focus on the content of what people are saying, not their spelling skills. I have more posts on here than I would care to count that include typos and misspeaks. I have also encountered a few. Its embarrassing, but altogether human. I manage to focus on what matters. Hopefully you get my point.