About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Acosta credits Liz Cheney with having "shot down" torture allegation, when in fact she dodged key question

May 18, 2009 6:43 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: CNN's Jim Acosta reported that Liz Cheney "shot down" the claim that harsh interrogations conducted in 2002 were aimed at "discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and Al Qaeda," but ignored that Cheney changed the subject when asked about an allegation that, in 2003, her father's office suggested an Iraqi detainee be waterboarded to obtain evidence of an Iraq-Al Qaeda link.

18 Comments

In crediting Liz Cheney with having "shot down" allegations that "in early 2002," harsh interrogations were being conducted to "discover[] a smoking gun linking Iraq and Al Qaeda," CNN correspondent Jim Acosta ignored the key question she was asked -- and avoided answering -- about an allegation that, in 2003, then-Vice President Dick Cheney's office suggested an Iraqi detainee be waterboarded to obtain evidence of an Iraq-Al Qaeda link. In response to that allegation, Cheney simply changed the subject.

From Acosta's report on the May 18 edition of CNN's American Morning:

[begin video clip]

ACOSTA: But even as Republicans are trying to turn the torture tables on Democrats, liberals are reaching to turn them back.

KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL (The Nation editor): The next big controversy is the mounting evidence showing that torture was used to extract evidence, to create a link -- a false link -- between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.

ACOSTA: Bush administration critics point to Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to former Secretary of State Colin Powell. On the website The Washington Note, Wilkerson says in early 2002, harsh interrogation was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S., but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and Al Qaeda -- a charge Dick Cheney's daughter shot down.

LIZ CHENEY: I think that it's important for us to have all the facts out. ... [T]his was an important program. It saved American lives.

[end video clip]

ACOSTA: As for Speaker Pelosi, Republicans acknowledge they don't have the votes to remove her, but all of the finger-pointing is renewing calls on Capitol Hill for an independent truth commission on torture, something the White House says it does not want -- John.

But during the exchange on the May 17 broadcast of This Week from which the Vanden Heuvel and Cheney clips were taken, Cheney was also asked -- by Stephanopoulos -- to respond to allegations of actions specifically taken by Vice President Cheney's office in 2003:

VANDEN HEUVEL: [Y]ou said, George, that the next big controversy is Guantanamo. The next big controversy is the mounting evidence showing that torture was used to extract evidence to create a link -- a false link -- between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida. That is a crucial area of investigation and another reason --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me just explain to the viewers what Katrina is -- a little more context in what she's talking about.

There were some reports this week that the vice president's office, actually, back in 2003, in April of 2003, I believe, sent some sort of word to Iraq that a detainee in custody should be waterboarded in order to get information to establish whether there was a connection between Iraq and Al Qaida, or more information on weapons of mass destruction -- your response.

Acosta did not mention Stephanopoulos' question, which appeared to refer to a May 13 Daily Beast article by former NBC News investigative producer Robert Windrem, who reported that in 2003 "the vice president's office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi prisoner who was suspected of knowing about a relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam."

Purporting to respond to Stephanopoulos, Liz Cheney said: "On this particular allegation, you know, nobody who's talking about this in the press has any knowledge of specific detainee treatment. And you saw the CIA yesterday come out and say, absolutely unequivocally, waterboarding was not used to establish this kind of a link." Cheney did not refute the specific allegations of actions taken by the Vice President's office that Stephanopoulos and asked about. Stephanopoulos then asked her again to respond to the allegation he had raised:

STEPHANOPOULOS: But I want to press one thing there, because there was a report -- no, but you've explained one part of it. I just want to ask you to explain another part of it: the report, though, that the vice president's office did ask specifically to have information about Iraq-Al Qaida connections presented to this detainee. Do you deny that?

In her response, Cheney did not deny or "shoot down" the allegation made in Windrem's article and instead shifted to attacking Wilkerson:

CHENEY: I think that it's important for us to have all the facts out. And the first and most important fact is that the vice president has been absolutely clear that he supported this program. This was an important program. It saved American lives.

Now, the way this policy worked internally was once the policy was determined and decided, the CIA, you know, made the judgments about how each individual detainee would be treated. And the vice president would not substitute his own judgment for the professional judgment --

STEPHANOPOULOS: Not no one in his office, either?

CHENEY: -- of the CIA. So, I think it's very important for us to look at exactly what the facts are. And the facts are that three people were waterboarded. The people that are, you know, claims to be waterboarded in these articles are not any of those people.

And I think, frankly, you've also got to look at the source of some of these allegations. And one of the big sources is, you know, Colonel Wilkerson. Now, Colonel Wilkerson gets coverage because of his associations with General Powell. And --

STEPHANOPOULOS: His former chief of staff.

CHENEY: -- has made a cottage industry out of, you know, fantasies about the vice president since he left office.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, he's not the only one reporting it, but it's good to get your answer.

In addition to Acosta's report, a May 17 post on CNN's Political Ticker blog about Liz Cheney's comments similarly ignored Stephanopoulos' question concerning allegations that, in 2003, Dick Cheney's office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi detainee to obtain evidence of an Iraq-al Qaeda link.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by open_mind (May 18, 2009 6:50 pm ET)
      5  
      Yes. Liz Cheney has apparently inherited the old Cheney dead-eye.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by carlileb5935 (May 19, 2009 2:27 am ET)
        4  
        The issue here is not Liz Cheney. The issue is Acosta, who ignored both the real question and the answer.

        Cheney's going to deceive, for sure. But what is CNN's excuse?
        Report Abuse
    • Author by pyratepete (May 18, 2009 7:29 pm ET)
      4  
      Besides her being realted to the most unpopular vice president in recent history what reason do I have to listen to her? She was a low level hack in the state department during the bush administration. Under what authority does she speak to the nation on the legality of torture, the legality of investigating her father or the justifications for torture. Was she in the room when these decisions were made? No. please make her go away.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by peebs755 (May 18, 2009 7:44 pm ET)
      7  
      It shouldn't by now, but it still amazes me how these people can lie, straight faced, when its so easy to debunk them. Its like someone with a chicken on their head denying there's a chicken on their head. all you have to do is look at them, and its evident that they're lying.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ksec (May 18, 2009 10:46 pm ET)
        6  
        Because they face no consequences when they lie.
        Maybe you can think of one time they were punished when they baldfaced lied to the American people, but I cant.
        Hell, they lied us into a war and suffered no consequences. One thing about us Dems, were as big a fraud as the repigs are corrupted.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by captfoster2 (May 19, 2009 9:24 am ET)
          2  
          "Because they face no consequences when they lie."

          That sir.... is exactly why these lunatics can lie with such ease!

          Unless Nancy Pelosi... (scratch that)... the damn media starts to do it's fricken job... and is willing to take all the real hard-core proof that these criminals and their hacks lied us into allowing torture to become part of the American conscience... (not to mention starting an illegal war, using 9/11 as a scare bludgeon, etc, etc

          You can bet these insects will continue to be straight faced into the camera with their lies.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by National_Insecurity (May 19, 2009 1:06 pm ET)
            1  
            capt, ksec,
            spot on!

            I'm still waiting for someone to ask Liz,
            "How do YOU know what transpired in 2001-2002-2003-2004? Were you in the room? Did you have clearance?
            "How did you have access to information that apparently Bob Graham and Nancy Pelosi did not have?"

            They act as though she IS the (former) VP. Liz Cheney is just Dana Perino without the looks, carrying dirty water for her overlord.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by wolf kotenberg (May 19, 2009 3:31 pm ET)
              1  
              Makes me wonder if she did have access to secret information thru her father, then the father is guilty of a security breach, something we all know his office has done before at a terrible cost of outing a CIA operative. WOW ! And who else has Liz cheney been talking to ?
              Report Abuse
      • Author by LisaLV711 (May 19, 2009 1:43 am ET)
        4  
        That amazes me too. She knows she's lying and everybody at that table knows she's lying so why don't they just call her out. We call them out in court. She should be called out. And the Republicants continue to call the media "liberal"? Really? Let her loose on a REAL newscast. Enough of these hush puppies commentators. What a farce! THEY'RE unAmerican!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by bilbo_dies (May 18, 2009 9:25 pm ET)
      6  
      First thing: other than the fact that she is the ex VP's daughter, just what are her credentials for being a commentator? Oh, that's right, you don't really need any valid credentials.

      Anyway, I did see her sunday on the new show. She was very well versed in her talking points, and I really love how they keep spewing the "it kept America and Americans safe". There is no data supporting this supposition. They can say that if it wasn't for the torture they wouldn't have been able to stop an attack but; there is no way to prove it. And besides, as an American, I do NOT want to be associated with torture of any type. If you become the enemy in every way except name then what is the difference?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wolf kotenberg (May 18, 2009 10:39 pm ET)
      7  
      Liz Cheney is not an elected official who has access to security matters. I would ask what her " need to know " is ?

      ?<<<LIZ CHENEY: I think that it's important for us to have all the facts out. ... [T]his was an important program. It saved American lives.>>> that line is straight from George Bush 43.

      and how can she admit three people were waterboarded ? One person waterboarded is a war crime on it's own.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by vonbargen9388 (May 19, 2009 12:44 am ET)
      4  
      Until this week, I didn't realize that liz cheney was part of the National Security Council and sat in on all the important policy decisions at the White House. Has any reporter bothered to ask her what the bases are for all her statements?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by justhnkng (May 19, 2009 10:57 am ET)
         
      i didn't realize until now that CNN is actually an acronym for Cheney's News Network!!! lol. CNN has been doing allot of "whitewashing" of the bush admistration lately!

      can anyone tell me or show me a clip of anderson cooper talking about the allegations of the use the "interogation techniques" stemming straight from cheney's office? u know AC loves to talk about all the politics of the day! lol.

      and i love how they have been running with the repubs' pelosi bit (and haven't work the convo back to the actual "torture" debate!) by the way, where did cheney's "speaking tour" kick off, when he started dissing the current admistration? things that make ya go hmm...lol! Seriously!!!???...
      Report Abuse
    • Author by dimes (May 19, 2009 11:00 am ET)
         
      Since when is Liz Cheney an expert on anything?

      Doesn't the family have a nice vacation home somewhere they can all repair to so they can bitch in peace and quiet, far away from the rest of us?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by afisher (May 19, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
      2  
      Each political party is always seeking to gain points with the public, yes, even if they redirect an answer and in some cases just out and out lie. The problem is that these individuals who are paid a bunch of money to have discussions are getting paid for NOT DOING THEIR JOB! We have seen this on both sides of the aisle and then they all wonder why their ratings are low or no one is buying newspapers, etc.
      Only when these paid talking heads start doing their jobs and calling out people when they redirect answers or mislead the public or ask the obvious follow-up question will we start listening again...until then, we'll stick with the Internet...where we can all provide immediate feedback to BS or faulty questions, etc!!!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by only_myschly3567 (May 19, 2009 2:44 pm ET)
      2  
      How is that "shooting down the question"!?!

      The issue has nothing to do with whether it works, how horrible it is, or whtvr. The issue is that the Bush administration forced someone to make up a non-existent connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq.

      This is what Right-wingers don't get... The reason the Iraq war sucked from day 1 and can never be spun around to "something good", no matter how much "the surge worked", is because it was all LIES. We had no reason to go in there in the first place.
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.