We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!

freedomslighthouse.net

Blog Archive

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Fox News' Megyn Kelly Schools Democrat Jerrold Nadler on CIA Investigation: "Let Me Just Educate You" - Video 9/1/09


Here is video of Fox News' Megyn Kelly telling Democrat Rep. Jerrold Nadler, "Let me educate you," about the facts regarding the supposed CIA "torture" interrogations.

Kelly was talking with Nadler about former Vice-President Dick Cheney's criticism of Attorney General Eric Holder and President Obama for going forward with investigations of Bush-era CIA operatives who interrogated terrorist suspects. Kelly was "educating" Nadler about the idea that CIA agents should be subjected to investigation when they were following legal advice at the time. She also educated him that Career Prosecutors at the Department of Justice looked into this five years ago and found nothing worthy of prosecution among the agents in question now.

Nadler said he was not aware of that investigation and Kelly said, "You're not?!" "Then let me just educate you." That exchange happens just before the 6:00 minute mark of the video if you want to go right to it.

8 comments:

Nelsa September 1, 2009 at 2:02 PM  
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nelsa September 1, 2009 at 2:13 PM  

At the VERY end of the video Nadler talks more about "additional information" which he NEVER elaborates on and then comes the money quote, ...Based on "THERE INTERPRETATION" of the law..."

That is precisely the problem. The LAW and the CHARGE have already been "interpreted" and it was decided there was no reason to persue any charges.

Megan had it right. If this witch hunt fails, will they revisit again in five more years.

The Ghicago way continues....

Diogenes September 1, 2009 at 4:27 PM  

How do we know they were "career prosecutors" who investigated this in 2004? Because The Big Dick Cheney says so???? Pardon me, but that blowhard has lied enough that he has no credibility.

If there's no criminal liability there, there's no criminal liability there. I doubt they even WANT to prosecute the CIA interrogators. They want to squeeze them so that they give up the big fish, like Addington, Woo, Bibee, Ashcroft, Rumsfeld and The Big Dick.

BrianinMO September 1, 2009 at 5:05 PM  

Diogenes,
I am really disappointed that you and other liberals seem to seriously want to put a Vice-President of the United States in prison who simply did what he believed necessary to protect the American people. It's one thing to disagree on policy, and want to defeat someone politically, but to be that vindictive is beyond the pale.

Dick Cheney has served America faithfully for many years. He was a great Secretary of Defense during the First Iraq War, and has always sought to keep America's defenses strong.

Maybe the Obama Administration needs to put their energies into protecting our nation against the enemies that would destroy our way of life instead of conducting a witch hunt intended to settle scores and harm political opponents.

If Obama continues down this road, he will hurt himself, because if they bring Cheney up on charges, be sure that Dick Cheney will defend himself capably and make the hearings or trial a debate on whether the Democrats are weakening America's defenses. The American people will not tolerate a President who is more worried about the comfort of terrorists than he is the lives of Americans.

Diogenes September 1, 2009 at 9:02 PM  

Brian, I don't give a crap about what Cheney did as an assistant to Nixon, as Chief of Staff for Ford, as a congressman, as Secretary of Defense for GHWB. When he egregiously breaks the law as Vice President, he deserves to be put on trial and, when found guilty, sent to prison. NO ONE gets to do just whatever they believe is necessary in our country. If you break the law -- and "breaking" the law is an understatement, he shattered the law -- you pay the price. Period. End of story.

And I've changed my position over time. I thought Clinton should have been removed from office for perjury. When Ford originally pardoned Nixon, I was furious -- but then, I came to believe that it probably WAS best for the country to pardon him.

But you know what? I was right the first time. Because, in pardoning Nixon, Ford sent a message to young Cheney et al: don't worry about the law. The President can do whatever he wants, and gets away with it. And Cheney took it to absolutely ABSURD lengths as Vice President. He hired the "right" lawyers (Addington, Bibee, Yoo) to give him absolutely inane legal opinions, saying the Executive Branch can do anything, say anything in wartime. Screw the Constititution: We Are The President. We don't answer to Congress. We don't answer to the Supreme Court. We answer to ourselves, and ourselves alone.

And that's never been the way the game was supposed to be played. That isn't close to what ANY of the writers of the Constitution had in mind when they clearly separated the three branches and set up a system of checks and balances. Cheney tossed it all in the trash can, and set himself up as judge, jury and executioner. And Bushie sat around with his thumb up his butt, either because he was too dull-witted to see what was happened, or he was so testicularly challenged that he wouldn't put a leash on Cheney.

If the government gets away with this AGAIN, after Nixon, after Clinton, then who the hell will EVER respect the rule of law again?

And as for Cheney turning this into ANY kind of debate, think again. Get his ass into a court of law, with REAL attorneys instead of the stooges who did his bidding in the White House, and he'll find out what the law is about. You don't get to bullshit the Rules of Evidence. You don't get to not answer questions you just don't like. You don't get to call a timeout and head over to Faux News for a creampuff "interview". You stand there and answer the questions that are asked of you. And Cheney hasn't come CLOSE to doing that yet.

Our country needs him to.

BrianinMO September 1, 2009 at 10:38 PM  

Diogenes,
You are totally blinded on this. Dick Cheney did not break the law. You just don't like him or the policy pursued by the Bush Administration, but that does not equal breaking the law.

Your party was out to get them from the time they won Florida in the 2000 election.

He has served honorably, and should be treated with respect. If you guys pursue this vendetta, it will be to your own destruction, because Americans will see it for what it is.

BrianinMO September 1, 2009 at 10:42 PM  

Diogenes,
I would add that under your line of thinking, both Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt would have to go to prison. Dick Cheney had nothing to do with anything even approaching what they did in wartime protection of the nation.

You and others on the Left need to focus on the enemy trying to destroy the country, and quit trying to pursue a vendetta against those with whom you disagree politically.

Diogenes September 2, 2009 at 10:50 PM  

"My party" in 2000 was the Republican Party. I voted for George Bush and Dick Cheney in 2000. I voted for every Republican presidential candidate since I was first registered in the 70s. I remained a registered Republican until August of 2008, when "my party" deserted ME.

Ceney did break the law. Read what he authorized (or got Bush to authorize). Most of it was totally unconstitutional, and every time it's come before the Supreme Court, SCOTUS has rebuked what Cheney did. Lincoln and Roosevelt bent the law but, in their defense, SCOTUS went along with them on both counts.

Sorry, but Cheney is a crook. And it has nothing to do with his political aspirations or his party affiliation. As I said, I believed Clinton should have gone down, too.

Right is right, and wrong is wrong. And it doesn't matter which party you belong to.

Or, at least, it SHOULDN'T matter.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP