Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Well the White House and some top Democrats are taking aim at former Vice President Dick Cheney.
After his explosive interview with our own Chris Wallace in an exclusive sit down with the FOX News Sunday host Cheney blasted the administration the current one.
And attorney general Eric Holder for launching an investigation into past CIA.
We asked those people to -- some very difficult and sometimes -- but their own lives at risk.
They do so -- the direction of the president they do so with the in this case we had specific legal authority from the Justice Department.
And if they are now going to be subject to being investigated and prosecuted.
By the next administration.
Nobody's gonna sign up for those kinds of missions it's it's a very very.
Devastating I think -- fat ass on morale inside.
The intelligence community.
So does mr.
Cheney have a point about how this will affect those who work at the CIA.
Democratic congressman Jerrold Nadler of New York is the chairman of the judiciary constitution subcommittee.
He thinks the attorney general is actually not going far -- here and wants investigations of those who cocaine these enhanced interrogation techniques.
In the first place good morning congressman good morning thank you very much for being here your response to that that specific point by the vice president which is essentially.
After the DOJ said they could do it -- -- national Security Council's advocate -- the administration's.
Said they could do it.
The DOJ review the conduct and said no prosecutors are prosecutions -- order our investigation were in order.
Now to turn -- investigate them his point is good luck finding CIA agents.
Who will obeyed orders in the future.
Well I hope we will not find CIA agents in the future who will torture people break the law the look -- in the United States was very clear -- and they torture anybody.
Obeying orders is no excuse.
And anyone who gives orders for torture is just as culpable as people who Obey those orders that they are now wife Laura -- and -- would tell us officials that and the -- -- agent and the question would be whether they reasonably relied on that if they reasonably relied.
I'm on something that appeared to them reasonable than their fine.
But if someone said ago.
Shoot that person if there was -- -- the plane you cannot reason and it's legal you cannot reasonably rely on such advice now the -- this is very clearly.
That and it is the obligation of the attorney general.
To see whether crimes are committed.
Any time it was torture under American jurisdiction he must do that if he didn't do that he be breaking the law.
My criticism the attorney general is that he should not -- -- the investigation to people in the field may have committed the torture.
But to people who may have board that I didn't vice president to me -- -- -- -- made -- decision I -- -- what I wanna I wanna just -- back to a couple of them.
First to follow up on -- your statement about those who take the orders and and who reasonably rely.
-- understand your analogy about you know if you shoot the guy in the air airplane but this is not know is alleging that here.
No no there's no that -- Sitting -- when you're here in your depositing.
That the CIA agents in the field after being told by Department of Justice attorneys -- CIA agents are not attorneys.
But being told by the attorneys at these techniques are okay that this is not torture and that it's all right to engage in these and then being given the go ahead to do it by their commanders.
Should second guess that that they as the main -- the agents in the field should say I know better than the Department of Justice lawyers.
First of all if the Department of Justice lawyers give them.
Advice that they are not entitled to rely and that's illegal advice and they cannot reasonably rely on that -- -- they don't -- they months for me finish they must.
Second guess that because the law says they must.
Secondly I'm not -- that they were right or wrong I'm simply saying that it's the obligation of the attorney general to him.
Initiate an inquiry and it may be that they'll conclude that these people they would have every right to rely on reasonable this year and I and they don't end up.
In fact of the matter congressman how -- these CIA agents in the field going to be second guessing attorneys who went to law school.
Who who -- the engineers who do you guys that case -- -- really asking is that really a practical solution of this.
It is a very much a practical solutions -- the look demands Ronald Reagan signed that law in 1986 I think it was.
And it was passed again by congress in 1999 -- six.
And it says that keep following it says very specifically the following orders is not an excuse we established that at -- commitment order in my whole legal advice legal legal advice and again heart they're just they're entitled to rely on legal advice so long as.
In the objective circumstances.
That advice was it was.
Reasonable and it may be that that that that that was that they were fine.
But the attorney general has an obligation under our law initiating agreed to look at that that's over saying that he should do and is doing.
That is to pick up on your other point about.
That you know that the Department of Justice in this investigation.
Fitness as you -- -- as our viewers probably remember five years ago there was an investigation by the Department of Justice into the CIA inspector general report.
And the Department of Justice then concluded that no investigations -- warranted the evidence wasn't there.
It was not to be done it didn't make any legal sense that they did just the fodder wasn't there.
Was made by career prosecutors at the DOJ not political appointees.
That one of the points Vice President Cheney made was that that to now reverse that to have a political appointee Eric Holder come in and reverse the decision by career.
Well really undermine the confidence there's any that government official on what he or she can do -- for some of Eric -- Is not under is not making any decisions he is -- the career prosecutor.
-- I think his name is very conservative Republican career prosecutor by the way.
Two to investigate make those decisions he simply initiated an investigation he's not making those decisions it would be improper.
Freddie political person to make -- the -- Second of my years ago set career appointees said no -- designation then warranted -- not familiar with that investigation five years ago but I think we know a lot you're not.
That's -- not this is important but I think -- Import I think there was a fascination and I think I think it -- I -- they asked for let me educate you.
There was a task force set up in 2000 for the eastern district of Virginia it was informally called the detainee abuse task force.
They investigate charges of CIA misconduct it was made up of career DOJ prosecuting not political -- things and those involved came out and said the federal prosecutors in view of reviewing the CIA misconduct there.
We're seasoned professionals who are not hesitated to go after the -- CIA agents that the situation was warranted.
Can answer sure.
I think we know a lot more now than we did in 2004 about what was done.
And about the orders under which they did it.
And I think that the attorney general is entitled and obligated.
Two in light of all these new facts to take -- to take -- that.
Regardless of where if you yeah -- -- -- IG report he looked at the instant day -- general report.
That's what this test for the attorney F five -- attorney the same thing it's not more information at the same on the contrary -- different decisions one by career prosecutors time period and one by political point.
-- -- country -- a lot more information now that is known there was no five years ago and a lot more than.
Presumably than than that that doctor was able take into effect.
At any rate that's the determination of the attorney general has more effects and you -- I do.
And all he has done is to authorize an investigation at preliminary inquiry not investigation -- preliminary inquiry.
To determine whether -- -- ought to be an investigation and this preliminary inquiry was handed to a very conservative Republican career.
Official in the justice.
My husband is trying to proactively manage traffic raises that they already made a decision on this five years ago -- but no -- facing -- with -- this now this attorney general says an investigation is warranted but now in five more years of you know -- decision you see how he can no CSF have some Americans could be -- I'll give you -- our -- this.
Attorney general has said an inquiry to determine whether an investigation is warranted is warranted there is no investigation is simply inquiry into whether -- ought to be an investigation.
And the fact is that when more facts come out.
Until the statute of limitations runs is always the prerogative and the duty.
Of someone in a prosecutorial position such as security general or -- position that to make such decisions.
To review and and and and reconsidered based on new information -- basement it frankly on on on on their understanding the law.
OK congressman thank you so much for coming out with your anti -- appreciate you being.
Filter by section