ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Rice Claims Ignorance Of CIA Tapes’ Destruction, Refuses To Comment On 2002 Interrogations

Today in a speech to the Women’s Foreign Policy Group, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refused to answer what she knew about the interrogations that were videotaped in 2002, and then destroyed two years later. When moderator Andrea Mitchell asked Rice when she learned of the destruction of the tapes, Rice replied, “I myself don’t recollect any knowledge of the tapes.”

When asked about the 2002 interrogations, however, Rice was less forthcoming:

MITCHELL: Could we just ask, since the interrogations took place in 2002 when you were national security adviser, at the time were you aware — fully aware of the techniques being used and the videotape?

RICE: As I said, the Justice Department has now taken up this matter, and so I don’t think that it’s appropriate for me to comment further.

Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/ricenociatorture.320.240.flv]

Rice is willing to publicly state that she had no knowledge of the tapes’ destruction in 2005, but won’t do the same on the 2002 interrogations.

In addition to Rice, at least five high-ranking administration officials and former officials have disavowed any knowledge of the tapes’ destruction. They have instead placed the blame on Jose Rodriguez, then the CIA’s head of the clandestine division. Former CIA officials, however, have described Rodriguez as “a cautious operator who probably would have ensured that top CIA managers knew of the plan” to destroy the torture tapes.

Digg It!

Transcript: Read more

Politics

Halliburton covering up gang rape of employee.

Former Halliburton/KBR employee Jamie Leigh Jones has revealed that she was gang-raped by her co-workers while working in Baghdad, and then left by the company in a “shipping container for at least 24 hours without food or water.” ABC News reports:

Jamie Leigh Jones, now 22, says that after she was raped by multiple men at a KBR camp in the Green Zone, the company put her under guard in a shipping container with a bed and warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she’d be out of a job. [...]

Over two years later, the Justice Department has brought no criminal charges in the matter. In fact, ABC News could not confirm any federal agency was investigating the case.

Legal experts say Jones’ alleged assailants will likely never face a judge and jury, due to an enormous loophole that has effectively left contractors in Iraq beyond the reach of United States law.

Jones is now trying to proceed with the case in civil court, but KBR is pushing for it to be heard in “private arbitration,” without a “public record or transcript.” Halliburton has “won more than 80 percent of arbitration proceedings brought against it.”

Politics

On The Record

The ONE Campaign’s put together a useful website, on the record that lets you see what the various presidential candidates have committed to in terms of extreme global poverty and disease. It’s got a comparison feature which reveals that the three major Democrats all have pretty similar positions. And sound ones at that, which is very good news, though with something like promises to spend billions on improving developing world access to education, the crux of the matter is not so much the difference between Clinton and Obama promising $2 billion a year and Edwards promising $3 billion a year as it is the question of what congress is willing to pony up.

On the Republican side you see some bigger difference. Here’s Romney, Huckabee, and Giuliani, for example, where you’ll see that Huckabee’s committed to doing the most whereas Giuliani’s never so much as publicly addressed most of these issues. That should tell you a thing or two about hizzoner’s depth of understanding of world affairs — he hasn’t rejected a particular approach to global poverty and development issue, he just hasn’t devoted any thought or attention to the issue whatsoever since if it doesn’t involve killing people or grandstanding, I guess he’s not interested.

Politics

Feingold wants answers on torture from Mukasey.

In light of news that the CIA destroyed tapes documenting the torture of detainees, Sen. Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) today wrote to Attorney General Michael Mukasey asking that he detail his views on interrogation. Mukasey repeatedly dodged these questions during his nomination hearings. From his letter:

During the hearing on your nomination to be Attorney General and in your answers to questions submitted for the record, you repeatedly refused to answer questions related to interrogation techniques on the grounds that you had not yet been briefed on the CIA’s interrogation and detention program. I was disappointed with these responses. [...]

Nonetheless, now that you have been sworn in as our nation’s Attorney General and presumably have been briefed on the program, I urge you to provide your views on its legality to Congress at the earliest possible date.

Politics

New Health Care Ad: If Dick Cheney Didn’t Have Government Care, ‘He’d Probably Be Dead Now’

cheneyhealthad.jpgIn Iowa today, 10 newspapers are running a full page ad advocating for a single-payer health-care bill, highlighting the fact Vice President Dick Cheney has benefited from his government-provided coverage. “If he were anyone else, he’d probably be dead by now,” the ad claims. Cheney, as the ad notes, has a long history of health problems:

The patient’s history and prognosis were grim: four heart attacks, quadruple bypass surgery, angioplasty, an implanted defibrillator and now an emergency procedure to treat an irregular heartbeat

The ad, which is sponsored by the California Nurses Association and the National Nurses Organizing Committee, argues that without his government-provided health care, Cheney’s recent heart problems would have been “a death sentence“:

For millions of Americans, this might be a death sentence. For the vice president, it was just another medical treatment. And it cost him very little.

Unlike the average American, the president, vice president and members of Congress all enjoy government-financed health care with few restrictions or prohibitive fees.

In response to the ad, Cheney spokesperson Megan Mitchell told the Wall Street Journal that “something this outrageous does not warrant a response.”

The factual and provocative ad isn’t outrageous. What is outrageous is the fact that there are roughly 47 million people in America without health insurance, including 3.2 million children, but President Bush vetoed legislation in October that would have extended coverage to 4 million more children.

While it is certainly good that Vice President Cheney was able get the medical attention he needed, the groups’ ad is right. “The rest of us deserve no less” than Cheney.

Politics

Derivative Classification

How is it exactly that a letter Jane Harman writes to the CIA manages to be classified? Harman doesn’t work for the CIA, after all. Spencer Ackerman gets the answer: a legal called “derivative classification.” This seems like an odd legal principle to me, but it seems well-established.

Politics

Huckabee wants to ‘take this nation back for Christ.’

In 1998, then-Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee spoke at the National Pastors’ Conference, explaining why he entered into politics:

hackds.jpgI didn’t get into politics because I thought government had a better answer. I got into politics because I knew government didn’t have the real answers, that the real answers lie in accepting Jesus Christ into our lives. [...]

I hope we answer the alarm clock and take this nation back for Christ.

In the past, Huckabee has also claimed that God supports Republicans. McCain, similarly, has claimed that “the Constitution established the United States of America as a Christian nation.”

UPDATE: Mother Jones has “contacted the Huckabee campaign and asked if it would help make his previous sermons available, the campaign replied in a one-sentence email that it had received multiple requests for such material and was ‘not able to accommodate’ them.”

Digg It!

Yglesias

The Nature of the Job

As you’ll recall, back when Michael Mukasey was nominated to be Attorney-General, some Democrats wanted him to acknowledge first that waterboarding is torture. He took the somewhat preposterous line that he couldn’t answer the question until he’d been confirmed. Convenient! Well, now it seems Russ Feingold hasn’t forgotten and is formally requesting a legal opinion from Mukasey.

If he finds the techniques used by the CIA to have been torture, which he said is illegal, then he will come under tremendous pressure to prosecute the interrogators and possibly even the administration officials who approved the illegal behavior. If he doesn’t conclude that they’re torture, he’ll be embracing a politically convenient and euphemistic definition of the law.

When you think about it, though, this isn’t a very hard choice to make. He’s going to embrace the politically convenient, euphemistic definition of the law. When Mukasey was up for the job, there was some sentiment that he should be confirmed because he’s a basically honest, ethical, competent guy. Realistically, though, there’s just no way a person in Mukasey’s position could do his job in an honest, ethical, and competent fashion. He’s not going to prosecute people for performing interrogation techniques the president authorized. And yet, those techniques are illegal. You need to either prosecute the interrogators or else (much better) immunize them for the purposes of prosecuting their superiors. But it’s not going to happen.

The nature of the job, now as well as at the time it was offered to Mukasey, is that carrying water for the criminal acts of current and former senior officials is a core responsibility. There isn’t — and wasn’t — any sense looking for an honest and ethical nominee because no honest and ethical person could possibly do the job. Mukasey may well have been a saint the day before he accepted the offer, but putting yourself in a senior position in the Justice Department these days is inherently a bargain with the devil.

Yglesias

The Trick

I know that to some liberals, Barack Obama’s rhetorical style bespeaks a lack of commitment to progressive values. I don’t see it that way. I’ve always seen it as a pretty transparent trick. He says he’s not one of those liberals, he doesn’t call people “wingnuts,” he understands the conservative point of view, blah blah blah, and then here comes his agenda of tax hikes, tons of new spending, ambitious carbon emissions curbs, less invading of other countries for no reason, gay equality, etc. And, remarkably, you keep seeing conservatives eat it up, discerning something incredibly “new” and “exciting” in a combination of conventional liberal policy views with vaguely conciliatory rhetoric.

Along those lines, Jason Zengerle flags this incredibly positive Steve Hayes Weekly Standard cover story on Obama. Particularly these bits:

[W]hile Obama eventually settles on the mainstream liberal position–path to citizenship, crack down on employers, don’t punish the workers–he does so only after acknowledging (and in some cases, embracing) the concerns of conservatives. He begins by criticizing George W. Bush on immigration from the right and says that his first priority in ending illegal immigration would be securing the borders. (Ask John McCain if it’s important to list border security first when detailing your solution.) [...]

This is the Obama trick, and it explains why, despite his very liberal voting record in the Senate (and in the Illinois Senate before that), he is not viewed as a left-wing ideologue. When a student asks Obama for his views on the Second Amendment, he reminds his audience that he taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago and is thus familiar with the arguments regarding the right to bear arms. He acknowledges “a tradition of gun ownership in this country that can be respected,” and says that his academic studies convinced him gun ownership “is an individual right and not just the right of a militia.”

As Jason notes, the striking thing here is “that Hayes recognizes this as a trick–and he still falls for it!” And also that it’s Steve Hayes who seems like a pretty hard-core hatchet man, “he’s an ideological water carrier of the first order. Is there any conservative writer able to withstand Obama’s charms? A nation turns its lonely eyes to Charles Krauthammer.” A quick Google reveals that back in July when Obama and Hillary Clinton were in their spat about talking to “bad guys” without preconditions, Krauthammer slammed Obama so, yes, he’s immune.

Climate Progress

Al Gore’s Nobel Prize Acceptance Speech

[JR: Kudos to Gore for the well-deserved Prize and a terrific speech.]

Also available online. A full video will be posted on Gore’s site later today, but you can view an excerpt here:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/12/gorenobel.320.240.flv]

Speech by Al Gore on the Acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize
December 10, 2007

Oslo, Norway

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Honorable members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen.

I have a purpose here today. It is a purpose I have tried to serve for many years. I have prayed that God would show me a way to accomplish it.

Sometimes, without warning, the future knocks on our door with a precious and painful vision of what might be. One hundred and nineteen years ago, a wealthy inventor read his own obituary, mistakenly published years before his death. Wrongly believing the inventor had just died, a newspaper printed a harsh judgment of his life’s work, unfairly labeling him “The Merchant of Death” because of his invention — dynamite. Shaken by this condemnation, the inventor made a fateful choice to serve the cause of peace.

Seven years later, Alfred Nobel created this prize and the others that bear his name.

Seven years ago tomorrow, I read my own political obituary in a judgment that seemed to me harsh and mistaken — if not premature. But that unwelcome verdict also brought a precious if painful gift: an opportunity to search for fresh new ways to serve my purpose.

Unexpectedly, that quest has brought me here. Even though I fear my words cannot match this moment, I pray what I am feeling in my heart will be communicated clearly enough that those who hear me will say, “We must act.”

The distinguished scientists with whom it is the greatest honor of my life to share this award have laid before us a choice between two different futures — a choice that to my ears echoes the words of an ancient prophet: “Life or death, blessings or curses. Therefore, choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”

Read more

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up