Hypocrisy Alert: Cheney Relies on the Objectivity of the Justice Department to Defend Torture
I am regularly amazed that public officials can say things in public without experiencing what should be obvious repercussions. The latest example? This doozy from former Vice President Dick Cheney regarding his sanctioning of torture (we have prosecuted waterboarding as torture in the past, so Cheney was defending torture), reported on the front page of yesterday's New York Times:
"The fact of the matter is the Justice Department reviewed all those allegations several years ago."
Okay, on its face, it seems like the most innocuous of statements, but there are two aspects to Cheney's latest outburst of lunacy that I find particularly outrageous.
First, and more obvious, is his blase acceptance that the United States of America could endorse torture. As I have argued many times, if the U.S. accepts the use of torture, it is spitting in the face of the very values of justice and due process that have made the country a beacon of democracy. If we torture, how can we oppose the behavior of oppressive regimes that do not respect the basic rights of human beings? If we maintain facilities like Guantanamo Bay and subject suspects to rendition, knowing full well they will be tortured in other countries, how are we any better than, say, North Korea seizing two journalists for committing no real crime?
As I noted when discussing the case of Lakhdar Boumediene, who was held and tortured in Guantanamo Bay even though courts in both Bosnia and the U.S. (one before his detention, one during) found he had committed no crime, Boumediene's experience with the U.S. government was substantively no better than than what Laura Ling and Euna Lee faced in North Korea. (Actually, based on accounts of how Ling and Lee were treated, and on their early release, their interaction with North Korea was most likely better than what Boumediene lived through with the U.S.) Is that the country in which we want to live? Do we want to live in a country whose values are closer to North Korea than, well, the United States in the pre-George W. Bush era?
It is even more infuriating when the overwhelming evidence is that the torture committed by the Bush administration didn't even help much, creating more terrorists than securing important data. And when a guy like retired general (and current National Security Adviser) Jim Jones says that the Obama administration has been more effective in fighting terrorism than the Bush crowd had been, it really should give people pause as to why it's even a debate that the country made a grave mistake in sanctioning torture.
But the thing that really bugs me about Cheney's quote (again, he said, regarding torture, that: "The fact of the matter is the Justice Department reviewed all those allegations several years ago.") is that in using the Justice Department as justification, he brings to mind the old story used to define the Yiddish word chutzpah: Someone who kills his parents and then throws himself on the mercy of the court as an orphan.
Let us review. The Bush administration, breaking with long-held policy and practice, politicized the Justice Department, moving it from an independent, apolitical defender of the laws of the country to a politicized arm of the Bush campaign. Candidates for positions that were supposed to be nonpolitical were judged to ensure they were conservative and Republican. Choosing ideology over merit, the administration hired 150 graduates of Regent University, Pat Robertson's school, which ranked in the lowest tier in the annual survey by U.S. News and World Report. Among the Regent alums in the Bush administration was Monica Goodling, the 33-year-old lawyer with no prosecutorial experience who was installed in the number-three position in the Justice Department, overseeing more than 90 U.S. Attorneys, who, in turn, managed thousands of lawyers under them.
And, of course, the Bush administration, in an unprecedented move, fired eight U.S. Attorneys, in the middle of Bush's second term, for wholly political reasons (namely, failure to go after Democrats and voter fraud issues that the administration wanted pursued). (Three articles on the topic are here, here and here.)
By the time the dust had settled, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Justice Department Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson, and Goodling were among the group of top Justice officials who resigned in light of the scandal.
The reason Bush's politicization of the Justice Department angered so many observers was that our democratic system relies on the dispassionate execution of our laws by the government, which is carried out by the Justice Department. To corrupt Justice is to corrupt the nation, putting the members of the executive branch above the law. The idea that U.S. Attorneys would be fired for not carrying out politically expedient prosecutions, or that candidates for Justice positions would be tested for their party loyalty, impugns the role of Justice as an impartial guardian of the law.
And a politicized Justice Department meant that Bush was able to secure opinions from the department that justified the use of torture. (A good survey of the issue is available here.)
So let's circle back to Cheney. Essentially, Cheney was drawing on the decades-old idea of the Justice Department as an independent body enforcing the law when he said the department had approved the use of torture, thus making it okay. But the gall of Cheney's statement is that he was a key part of an administration that deconstructed the very objectivity on which he now relies. Like the parent-murderer who now wants sympathy for being an orphan, Cheney wants us to trust the objectivity of a Justice Department he helped politicize.
How is it that Cheney was allowed to make such a baldly hypocritical and self-serving statement without being challenged? It's outrageous.
I don't know why I'm surprised. We have a gubernatorial candidate in Virginia who argued in a thesis that women shouldn't work, the U.S. Supreme Court shouldn't have legalized contraception for unmarried people, and religion should be more prominent in schools, while decrying homosexuality and "fornicators." If Robert McDonnell was in the running for a position at Fox News, he would be an excellent candidate, but someone who espoused these extreme views shouldn't be aspiring to any office in a purple state like Virginia. And yet, according to the Washington Post, he is ahead in the polls.
Which reminds me of one of my favorite expressions: Democracy works, just not always like you want it to. If the people of Virginia elect this guy, they will get what they deserve. And if Americans take Dick Cheney seriously (or elect him president, as a bats*!%-crazy Wall Street Journal editorial called for), we, too, will have to live with the results.
We are currently dealing with the devastation that eight years of Bush rule did to the economy and our international standing. I can't imagine why anyone would take anything Cheney has to say seriously, especially when he engages in such hypocritical practice as relying on a Justice Department he tainted for justification of his actions. That is, simply put, chutzpah.
Jon Soltz: The Weakness of Liz Cheney
In the end, Liz Cheney and Keep America Safe are just a re-run of what was already tried and failed in 2008. Namely, using the veil of fear to mask an un-informed, false, and weak position.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
""6 million Jews slaughtered in the death camps. So that wasn't genocide, right?""
Der Spiegel wrote several articles on that there count was:
330,000
Most were gypsies and street people
The rest were Jews
I am not defending genocide but get your figures correct..
Oh, please. This is getting awfully stale.
I am guessing you also think that we did not land on the moon, that 9/11 was an inside job, and that Dick Cheney is a good American.
Maybe what Cheney should have said is we haven't been attacked since Republican's aren't in charge with their false flags and code reds at the most appropriate times.
Someomne needs to tell Cheney he is not Vice President any more or better yet president any more so he should shut his pie hole. His 8 years are up for all the damage him and Bush did we would like to never hear from either of them again !
Cheney continues to say that we have not been attacked for the last 8 years...not true...what about the attacks in London, Spain and tunisa(sp) and the attempts in Germany. Why didnt the torture we were doing stop these events. When we were torturing these people if they started to tell us about the terrorist plan to attack London are torture pros said, "No we dont want to know about that...we just want to know about attacks on the US only." Silly....really when you think about it.
It reminds me of the people in Germany during WW 2 that let their jewish friends get taken away because..well, "I'm not jewish, so why do I care." So our european friends get attacked by al qeda but that doesnt count. Give me a break.
This was a great article!! god I miss Cheney, a time when we had a strong secure government.. a time when we knew how to defend our self..Instead now we are much like a little child in a world of bad guys just waiting to be abused.. Thanks for the incredibly great article
Unlike you, most of the rest of us wish he would just go away.
The chutzpah definition was a great one. But a more worrying one comes to my mind... the definition of a politician, "Someone that can get covered in shite, yet still come up smelling like roses".
This was a great article!! god I miss Cheney, a time when we had a strong secure government.. a time when we knew how to defend our self..Instead now we are much like a little child in a world of bad guys just waiting to be abused.. Thanks for the incredibly great article
Do you always repeat yourself?
Die deutschen verfolgt fur die geschichte und das ist america spielen Josef Mengele
The germans persecuted for history and now america took the role of plaing Josef Mengele
Cheney and his agents are busted .. face facts liars
http://www.tortureteam.org
Pelosi tortures, too- she know, and she's Speaker. This is historic in so many ways.
Current administration is demonstrating similar levels of hypocrisy. Why not write about something that can actually be changed, rather than dwelling on the past?
There's time to change a lot of things: including Cheney's status as a free man.
Excellent post; I even used the chutzpah definition myself a few days ago, although I don't remember if my post got past the HuffPo moderator. Because so little of the media and almost none of the right are, uh, fact-based, as the sadly necessary buzzword is these days, we have to keep on going over the obvious and well-established points again and again, especially providing the links as the author does here.
I always found it hilarious each time the Shrub Administration called facts they didn't like "revisionism," as if they knew what the word meant or what the revisionists are doing to history. But the hypocrisy of Cheney and his defenders as they revise the record of their merciless attack on core national values is breathtakingly thoroughgoing.
Of course, it won't be hilarious if they get away with it. Closer to tragic, actually, and all who love democracy, the rule of law, and the great ideals of America would then be weeping.
Cheney does not rely on impartiality. IF he willingly goes to court it is because he knows nothing will happen to him. If he or his buddies bought off or threatened a few judges to stay free it is most assuredly not beyond him.
SEND HIM TO JAIL!
Other than the innocents tortured on his orders he will keep his rights and his health. But the same rules that give him those rights make every single important decision he made the last 20 years a crime.
They are calles the constitution.
He tried to destroy it and did a good job doing it. And that again is a crime.
Dick Cheney is guilty of war crimes. Investigate. It's the law.
This is really getting old...
It's not torture when the Attorney General, Congressional Leadership (Dems I might add) and the Fed. Courts say it's not... that Waterboarding is ok. Also, several Fed. Prosecutors looked at all of this and essentially said; "Move on..."
"You're amazed that Public figures can say things, etc..." So am I:
“They’re carrying swastikas and symbols like that to a town meeting on health care.” -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in an August 5 interview
"What good is reading the bill if it’s a thousand pages and you don’t have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you read the bill?” -- Rep. John Conyers (Mich.) at the National Press Club, July 24
“What we’re seeing right now is close to Brown Shirt tactics.“ -- Rep. Brian Baird, (Wash.) told a local newspaper
“I hope people will take a jaundiced eye to what is clearly the Astroturf nature of so-called grassroots lobbying ... The Astroturf nature of grassroots lobbying, which is largely the term for, you know, this is manufactured anger.” -- White House spokesman Robert Gibbs
“These are nothing more than destructive efforts to interrupt a debate that we should have, and are having. They are doing this because they don’t have any better ideas … It’s really simple: They‘re taking their cues from talk-show hosts, Internet rumor-mongerers and insurance rackets.” -- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.)
As far as I know, John McCain is the only current politician to have endured torture, and he is against the practice of water boarding...
The Justice Department should not be politicized and their pursuit against improper CIA interrogations is appropriate.
Why is Dick Cheney so vocal against these investigations? Does he have anything to hide?
You're comparing what McCain went through to the handful of 'animals' we legally dealt with, the results were thousand's of lives saved (not disputed)? I respect McCain but he's wrong. Saving thousands of lives through the process we used is the definition of morality.
The Justice Dept. has been and always will be political. Law is political.
There is no current leader of the GOP and times like this (new Pres.) the last Admin. typically assumes that role. Does he have something to hide? Maybe, but could it not also be that he cares having seen first hand what's at stake here?
According to the administration and the courts in Nazi Germany, it was perfectly legal for Hitler to have 6 million Jews slaughtered in the death camps. So that wasn't genocide, right?
If something's wrong, it's wrong. I'm assuming that since you don't believe that water-boarding and such are torture, then it's OK with you if those tactics are used against our servicemen and women - after all, they're not torture, right?
Why do you hate our troops?
You are saying, 3 or so people water boarded and treated bad (mental stuff) is the same thing as 6 million human lives? I don't think I can even respond to that... I was at Auschwitz in June of this year in Poland... Brother, you have no idea what you're saying...
Yes, I would agree with you regarding water boarding AS LONG as the same process was followed - known terrorists, known to have info that could save lives, AG and courts involved all the way with Congressional leadership and the Pres. makes the call, absolutely, it saves lives of innocent people!!! That's the morally correct thing to do...
Exactly which of these statements is a problem to you, given that they are 100% true and accurate?
Which of the "talk-show hosts, Internet rumor-mongerers and insurance rackets" is telling you what to think?
Nobody, aside from sadists like yourself and Cheney, has said "waterboarding is OK". The whole point of this article is that the Justice Department is no longer a disinterested and neutral enforcer of the law. Can't you read? You are doing exactly what the article says Cheney is doing.
There is absolutely NOBODY with any experience in either interrogation or torture who will tell you that is even effective, much less legal or "OK". And if you are saying it is OK, explain to me why we executed several Japanese after WWII for waterboarding American soldiers?
A) I observe form multiple sources and make my own decisions.
B) Many (I'd say most Americans) say it's ok to Water board and be rough (mental and physical) with known terrorists with info about future attacks - yes I can read and there's so little worth actually reading, although I do some on HP - you-all are more entertaining
C) Correction - There's no-one on the left... There is no debate that multiple Water Boards saved thousands of lives - if there was, you would have heard that definitively (key word) from Nancy, Harry and other sr. leaders. Water Boarding was the easiest thing to endure for Japanese prisoners
One for you - If we have a known terrorist in custody that we knew had details about a dirty bomb in your home city... if the terrorist was not cooperating would you not do this and let your family and thousands of others die? If you say yes, you're either not honest or a morally confused individual...
I think Cheney and Addington are the type of people who like to be scared and have secret plans, codes, handshakes, clubhouses, etc.
In a broader sense, Americans don't seem to be fulfilled unless they have something on a very low order of probability to be worried about.
Instead of worrying about putting crappy food inside of them everyday (high probability of debiliatating illness) in the future, they worry about child abductions and lightning strikes(very low probability).
Instead of worrying about the sorry state of our current private healthcare system they'd rather be worried about make-believe 'death panels'!
I have a very selfish attitude toward torture. I won't oppose the use of torture as long as those, like former VP Cheney, will agree that the United State, by using these methods, is in total agreement and acceptance of the use of torture on our own military men and women by our enemies. I'll support Cheney if he can stand tall and tell the American people that we, as a nation, not only expect but intend to use "enhanced interrogation methods" and we will not take any action against those countries who also use these methods and believe that they do not violate the Geneva convention. I would also like to see the volunteer army that would result in the public pronouncement of such a policy. In most circles that would be called "throwing your troops under the bus" but I fear using Cheney's logic that would also be considered acceptable behavior - as long as you had the Justice Deparment write you a brief about it first.
What really hacks me off is the fact that CHENEY and BUSH THREW THE GRUNTS under the bus,,,,Remember, there were just a few BAD APPLES.....LET THE CHICKENS COME HOME TO ROOST....We are a nation of Laws and those clowns pissed on the GENEVA CONVENTION....and their own soldiers......
It's appalling.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
