Why Obama Saying ‘Torture’ Matters

On Friday, the president went further than Senate Intelligence in harshly characterizing CIA abuses, making a powerful statement in the process.

National Journal
James Oliphant
Add to Briefcase
James Oliphant
Aug. 1, 2014, 12:47 p.m.

Fri­day wasn’t the first time Pres­id­ent Obama used the word “tor­ture” to de­scribe the “en­hanced in­ter­rog­a­tion tech­niques” used by the Cent­ral In­tel­li­gence Agency against ter­ror­ism sus­pects, but this time might be the most mean­ing­ful.

Obama’s re­marks came at the end of an im­promptu ses­sion with re­port­ers in the White House brief­ing room. Asked about a clas­si­fied Sen­ate re­port that delved in­to CIA ac­tions dur­ing the Bush ad­min­is­tra­tion, the pres­id­ent re­spon­ded by say­ing the re­port con­cluded that in the af­ter­math of the 9/11 at­tacks, “we did some things that were wrong. We did a whole lot of things that were right, but we tor­tured some folks. We did some things that were con­trary to our val­ues.”

Obama made sim­il­ar re­marks last year in a speech at the Na­tion­al De­fense Uni­versity — and, as far back as 2009, he re­ferred to “wa­ter­board­ing” as tor­ture. But it car­ries great­er weight now, with the ex­pect­a­tion that por­tions of the Sen­ate re­port will be de­clas­si­fied in the com­ing days at the ur­ging of the White House.

That re­port, which chron­icles a series of CIA ab­uses, does not use the word “tor­ture” to char­ac­ter­ize ex­cess­ive in­ter­rog­a­tion prac­tices, ac­cord­ing to The Daily Beast. Sen. Di­anne Fein­stein, the chair­wo­man of the Sen­ate In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee, which con­duc­ted the probe has said its find­ings will re­veal ab­use that is “chilling” and “sys­tem­at­ic and wide­spread.” The re­port is also ex­pec­ted to con­clude that the en­hanced tech­niques were not ef­fect­ive in yield­ing use­ful in­tel­li­gence.

“Tor­ture” and the con­nota­tions it car­ries has been a loaded word polit­ic­ally since George W. Bush’s first term. And Obama’s de­cision to use it im­me­di­ately sparked out­rage from con­ser­vat­ives on Twit­ter. (Obama was also cri­ti­cized for us­ing the col­lo­qui­al “folks” to de­scribe those in­ter­rog­ated.)

But it ap­pears to have been a choice by the pres­id­ent to cast the CIA’s prac­tices in the most bru­tal terms in or­der to make his con­dem­na­tion of them as power­ful as pos­sible, send­ing a sig­nal both at home and abroad that such prac­tices are no longer sanc­tioned. That way, when the re­port does be­come pub­lic, Obama’s words Fri­day will still be echo­ing. At the same time, it likely will do little to mol­li­fy crit­ics who say his ad­min­is­tra­tion has failed to hold CIA agents who con­duc­ted the in­ter­rog­a­tions leg­ally ac­count­able.

Obama also used the oc­ca­sion to sup­port CIA Dir­ect­or John Bren­nan, who apo­lo­gized this week to law­makers after an in­tern­al probe found that CIA agents had broken in­to com­puters used by the Sen­ate In­tel­li­gence Com­mit­tee. At least one mem­ber of that com­mit­tee, Mark Ud­all of Col­or­ado, has called for Bren­nan to resign. But the pres­id­ent seemed to put that mat­ter to rest, for now. “I have full con­fid­ence in John Bren­nan,” Obama said.

What We're Following See More »
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
COMMISSIONERS NEED TO DELIBERATE MORE
FCC Pushes Vote on Set-Top Boxes
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."

Source:
UNTIL DEC. 9, ANYWAY
Obama Signs Bill to Fund Government
11 hours ago
THE LATEST
REDSKINS IMPLICATIONS
SCOTUS to Hear Case on Offensive Trademarks
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.

Source:
IT’S ALL CLINTON
Reliable Poll Data Coming in RE: Debate #1
13 hours ago
WHY WE CARE
×