February 11, 2010

Chris Hayes is asked to respond to this op-ed from The Wall Street Journal -- Cheney's Revenge The Obama Administration is vindicating Bush antiterror policy:

Dick Cheney is not the most popular of politicians, but when he offered a harsh assessment of the Obama Administration's approach to terrorism last May, his criticism stung—so much that the President gave a speech the same day that was widely seen as a direct response. Though neither man would admit it, eight months later political and security realities are forcing Mr. Obama's antiterror policies ever-closer to the former Vice President's. Read on...

Hayes notes that the Obama administration has followed what the Bush administration has done in regard to terrorism way more than anyone on the left would like and points out that even though there's been very little difference in the policies those on the right are not only trying to maintain the status quo, but move it even further to the right.

From Hayes' publication The Nation:

The hosts of Morning Joe turn to Chris Hayes to debate the merits of a Wall Street Journal editorial called "Cheney's Revenge," which suggests that the American people prefer the way Bush and Cheney dealt with terrorists by skipping over the Miranda rights that are normally afforded to criminals. Hayes and host Joe Scarborough disagree on whether most Americans want Miranda rights to be applied to foreign terrorist suspects.

Hayes argues that no matter what people want, due process of law is in the Constitution and applies to foreign criminals and illegal immigrants. "This is a really important point to hammer home," Hayes says. "The Constitution does not...simply apply to citizens. This is absolutely 1,000 percent settled law and the 14th amendment means that it [applies] to anyone who's picked up and arrested."

Chris Hayes could not have been arguing with a thicker skull than Scarborough who of course didn't want to let a few facts get in the way of his preconceived notions. Zuckerman isn't much better chiming in.

Scarborough: I think that when you Mirandize an enemy combatant that is trying to destroy, kill Americans and blow up American buildings and aren’t Americans citizens… ahh… no. I have no interest in applying Miranda rights to that person…

Zuckerman: The Supreme Court… the Supreme Court…

Hayes: Should Timothy McVeigh have been Mirandized?

Scarborough: Timothy McVeigh was an American citizen my man. Big difference. Let Mort in here.

Zuckerman: The Supreme Court does allow for a different set of rules to apply to war criminals. It is not the same as having those same rules applied to the American citizenry.

Scarborough: Let me let Chris have the last word.


Hayes: Look, Mort, the whole point is a war criminal is not determined prior to due process so you cannot just say prior to the actual Constitutional due process, dub someone a war criminal and then deny them the due process required by the Constitution.

Scarborough then claims that we still need to “muddle through this” and “figure out what the rules of the game are” as though there is actually any question. They then get poor Chris Hayes to hang around for another twenty minutes and don’t bring the topic up again. Sadly since the Obama administration has given the Bush administration a pass for their war crimes the Scarboroughs and Wall Street Journals of the world have cover as well for their B.S. We'll see if the Brits manage to do any better. I'm not holding my breath.

Can you help us out?

For nearly 20 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.