director of cia, we have to think about the sentiments reagan had about the convention against torture. and not bring someone who is a party to that in one of the ugliest periods. laura: we have to scour the cia looking for someone who spoke out against what was happening at the enhanced interrogation sites? i m not an expert in how to interrogate people. there are good arguments it may not of been the right way to go. i think we were trying anything with someone like leachate mohammed. democrats are with collegiate mom and i guess on gina haspel is not qualified. i think there is a fairly wide consensus against torture and extreme feeling among americans and liberals, democrats in general. we are not talking about the intention to apply torture as we see it in the third world. i m coming from a region where torture was applied to get a
he hasn t seen in. msnbc s ari melber notes it doesn t necessarily have to come from the white house as draft for a potential executive action. can you notice sean spicer didn t deny they were considering it. if donald trump, as he advocated on the campaign trail, wants open up torture laws, talk about enhanced interrogation, talk about waterboarding, is he going to be able to do that with executive action? never. it s against the law, against international law. by the way, it goes beyond torture. it s also abuse of detainees. i think, to be blunt, i can t imagine our secretary of defense, jim mattis, allowing this to happen. now, i think the lesser question is these secret interrogation sites.
they were kidnapped and tortured by the cia. they sought to sue the company that helped with logistics. the case got thrown out by a federal appeals court. the bush administration s extraordinary rendition program goes unchecked yet again. johnathan turley will join us. the 6-5 ruling from the ninth circuit court of appeals. upholding the government s decision to invoke the state secrets doctrine. the plaintiffs cannot sue a boeing subsidiary for the assistance it provided to the cia. the men claiming the company provided flight planning and logistical support services to government officials. the men were apprehended and transported to secret interrogation sites. where they claim they were beaten, starved, subjected to humiliation, degradation, physical and psychological torture by u.s. officials. the government is not disputing many of the key facts of the case including the torture. a spokesman telling the los angeles times the attorney general adopted a new policy last year to en
provided flight planning and logistical support services to government officials. the men were apprehended and transported to secret interrogation sites. where they claim they were beaten, starved, subjected to humiliation, degradation, physical and psychological torture by u.s. officials. the government is not disputing many of the key facts of the case including the torture. a spokesman telling the los angeles times the attorney general adopted a new policy last year to ensure the state secrets privilege is only used in cases where it is essential to protect national security, and we are pleased that the court recognized that the policy was used appropriately in this case. the majority reluctantly concluding that the national security interests trump quote, even the most compelling necessity to protect the fundamental principles of liberty and justice. five judges dissented. calling the decision premature and calling the government s torture a gross, notorious act of despotism. the
interrogation sites. the government is not disputing many of the key facts of the case including the torture. the attorney general adopted a new policy last year to ensure the state secret privilege is only used in cases where it is essential to protect national security and we are pleased that the court recognized that the policy was used appropriately in this case. the majority reluctantly concluding that it trump even the most compelling necessity to protect the fundamental principles of liberty and justice. five judges dissented. the bush administration invoked the state s secret privilege when the suit was first filed in 2007. the case was later reviewed by attorney general holder who endorsed the bush administration decision. the attorney noting if the decision is allowed to stand, the u.s. would have closed its courtroom doors to torture victims adding to date not a