MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript

Interview

MSNBC "The Ed Show" - Transcript

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Joining me now is Congressman Jerry Nadler, a member of the House Judiciary Committee.

Congressman, good to have you in studio with us tonight.

REP. JERROLD NADLER (D), NEW YORK: Good to be here.

SCHULTZ: You said that this is a starting point. What does that mean?

NADLER: Well, first of all, it‘s a starting point in two senses.

Number one, this is simply an investigation or preliminary inquiry into whether laws were broken which could lead to an investigation, which could lead to prosecutions and indictments. So, it‘s the first step in that step.

But, second of all, this doesn‘t go nearly far enough. It doesn‘t go nearly far enough morally or legally.

The law is—and there‘s no discretion—the law is that when torture occurred under American jurisdiction—which it clearly did—then there must be an investigation of all people who may have been involved in that and, if warranted, prosecutions. Now, the order that the attorney general signed is silent with regard to whether they will investigate the people who, as far as I‘m concerned, deliberately misdated the law (INAUDIBLE), in order to conspire to get the torture done. And there should be an investigation of them and of all other people up the chain of command, including perhaps the vice president.

And secondly, specifically excludes from any inquiry CIA agents who relied on those memos in good faith. And the point is, the law says that following orders is no excuse, and they ought to be at least looked at to see whether they reasonably relied on those memos.

SCHULTZ: Is there a political downside, in your opinion, for the Obama administration with the appearance that they may be going too far, that this is a witch hunt? And if it turns out that they did stop attacks, I mean, to this point we don‘t think they have, but...

NADLER: Well, first of all, the FBI refused to participate in these tortures because they said it was against American law and they said it was ineffective. And all the evidence that we‘ve seen in my committee is that it was ineffective. But the real question is, was the law violated? And that seems clear in the question as to who did it.

SCHULTZ: But are you concerned that maybe the Obama White House is not aggressive enough? I mean, the base wants full disclosure.

NADLER: Well, first of all, I am concerned that we‘re not being aggressive enough. I don‘t think it‘s up to the White House.

We criticized the Bush administration for making prosecutorial decisions on a political basis. It‘s up to the attorney general, not the White House. And yes, they ought to not be limiting the investigation as they are limiting it, as I said before. It ought to look at the higher ups too and it ought to look at everybody involved.

SCHULTZ: What about the pushback from the right? Almost instantly, Dick Cheney saying that this stopped massive attacks. I‘d like some details on that, and I think Americans would. But also, Peter King, he even throws out you wonder whose side they are on and this is a war against the CIA.

NADLER: Well, I think that‘s ridiculous. And it shouldn‘t be a war against the CIA, nor is it.

It‘s a quest to vindicate American law. And all the attorney general is doing is following the law.

The law says he must do this. If he didn‘t do it, he‘d be breaking the law.

SCHULTZ: Yes.

Are you concerned that CIA Director Leon Panetta will resign over this? And he obviously didn‘t have anything to do with it. This is a five-year-old story. But the fact is, he has said if there are prosecutions, he would resign.

NADLER: Well, first of all, we don‘t know if there will be prosecutions. We don‘t know if there should be prosecutions. This is a preliminary inquiry.

Second of all, if the facts say that there should be prosecutions, then they should. And if he chooses to resign, then too bad.

The fact is, the law must be obeyed because this is a nation of laws, and no one may be above that. And let me say one other thing.

We are well into territory already where because of the pardon of Nixon after Watergate and the people around him, because of the pardon of the Iran-Contra, where we‘re getting into territory where it becomes taken for granted that high officials can violate the law and get away with it. If high officials violated the law here, if Cheney did, if Rice did, et cetera, they‘ve got to be prosecuted to show that no one is above the law.

SCHULTZ: Are you curious as to if they were advised or were they direct orders, this is how we‘re going to handle terror suspects? Because that‘s against the law. I mean, were these agents ordered to do this to these suspects?

NADLER: Well, I don‘t know that, and to the extent they were, then the higher ups ought to be prosecuted if they were ordered to do illegal things. But that is—but following orders, the law specifically says, is not an excuse for torture.

SCHULTZ: Congressman Nadler, good to have you on. Thanks so much.

NADLER: Thank you. Good to be here.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source