Interview. Plus the Drone Program, killing suspected terrorists. Could we view drones years from now the same way some of us are viewing interrogation tactics today . In fact, most of the individuals who we kill, we have much less information about than the individuals, the 119 captured. Also, thousands gather in cities across the country to protest Police Treatment of black men. As a young black man, youre profiled constantly. Why is there so much distrust between police and africanamericans . I think those fightorfight instincts wont be present in Police Officers is to deny humanity. Im chuck todd. Joining us are former Senior Adviser to president obama, david axelrod, nbcs chief Foreign Affairs correspondent andrea mitchell, Helene Cooper of the New York Times and former chief spokesman for the coalitioner provisional authority in iraq, dan senor. Welcome to sunday. Its meet the press. Announcer from nbc news in washington, this is meet the press with chuck todd. Good morning. Some late news, last night the Senate Approved a 1. 1 trillion spending bill. It will fund the government through next september. Bottom line, no Government Shutdown this year or perhaps next as well. Lets get to our big story, the Senate Report on what some call torture, what others call enhanced interrogation techniques. The report put together by Senate Democrats on the intelligence committee. Its a detailed and in some cases shocking indictment of the methods used to interrogate detainees. Theres no shortage of critics of what the cia did. Former Vice President dick cheney. Welcome back to meet the press. Good morning, chuck. Its good to be back. Let me start with quoting you. You said earlier this week torture was something that was very carefully avoided. It implies that you have a definition of what torture is. What is it . Well, torture to me, chuck, is an american citizen on a cell phone making a last call to his four young daughters shortly before he burns to death in the upper levels of the trade center in new york city. On 9 11. Theres this notion that somehow theres moral equivalence between what the terrorists did and what we do, and thats absolutely not true. We were very careful to stop short of torture. The senate has seen fit to label the report torture, but we worked hard to stay short of that definition. What is that definition . The definition is the one that was provided by the office of legal counsel. We went specifically to them because we did not want to cross that line into where we were violating some International Agreement that we had signed up to. They specifically authorized and okayed, for example, exactly what we did. All of the techniques that were authorized by the president were, in effect, blessed by the Justice Department opinion that we could go forward with those without, in fact, committing torture. Let me go through some of those techniques used. Khan, was then subjected to involuntary rectal feeding and hydration. It included two bottles of ensure. Later in the day his lunch tray consisting of hummus, pasta with sauce, nuts and raisins was pureed and rectally infused. Does that meet the definition of torture . That does not meet the definition of what was used in the program. I understand, but does that meet the definition of torture in your mind . No my mind, ive told you what meets the definition of torture. Its 19 guys armed with Airline Tickets and box cutters did to 3,000 americans on 9 11. What was done here apparently certainly was not one of the techniques that was approved. I believe it was done for medical reasons. Well, there is no the medical community has said there is no if you look, for example, at Jose Rodriguezs book, and he was the guy running the program, hes got a very clear description of how, in fact, the program operated. With respect to that, i think the agency has answered it in its response to the committee report. But you acknowledge this was over and above. That was not something that was done as part of the Interrogation Program. But you wont call it torture . Im it wasnt torture in terms of it wasnt part of the program. Let me ask you this. Weve got al najar, had he handcuffing of one or both of his wrists to an overhead bar, would not allow him to lower his arms 22 hours a day for 22 days in order to break his resistance. He was also wearing a diaper and had no access to toilet facilities. Was that acknowledged . Was that part of the program that you approved . I cant tell from that specifically whether it was or not. Page 53 of the report. The report is seriously flawed. I didnt talk to anybody who knew anything about the program. They didnt talk to anybody that was in the program. The best guide for what, in fact, happened is the one thats the report that was produced by the three cia directors and deputy directors of the cia when this program was undertaken. And in fact, it lays out in very clear terms what we did and how we did it. And with respect to trying to define that as torture, i come back to the proposition torture was what the al qaeda terrorists did to 3,000 americans on 9 11. Theres no comparison between that and what we did with the respect to enhanced interrogation. But some of these tactics went above and beyond what was approved. Heres another one. Let me read you another one here. Over a 20day period, aggressive interrogation, spent a total of 266 hours, 11 days, two hours in a large coffinsize containment box, 29 hours in a small confinement box, width of 21 inches, says depth of 2. 5 feet, height of 2. 5 feet. Thats on page 42, is that going to meet the standard and definition of torture . I think that was, in fact, one of the approved techniques. In terms of torture, i guess what i was struck, for example, by the statements by bud day and Leo Thorsness and admiral denton, these are three folks who were captured by the north vietnamese, held for years, subject to extreme torture and all of whom said that waterboarding was not torture. Now, you can look for various definitions. We did what was, in fact, required to make certain that Going Forward we were not violating the law. And the law, as interpreted by the Justice Department, the office of legal counsel, was very clear. And the techniques that we did, in fact, use that the president authorized that produced results, that gave us the information we needed to be able to safeguard the nation against further attacks and to be able to track down those guilty for 9 11 did, in fact, work. Now, the senate committee, partisan operation, no republicans involved, no interviews of anybody involved itself all cia documentation. Chuck, if youll look at it and if youll look at the people running the agency said and what Jose Rodriguez said who ran the program, who is a good man, that, as i said the other day, i wont use the word on your show, its a crock. Its not true. Have you read more of the report . Ive read parts of it. Not the whole thing. It hasnt been released. The summary. The summary. Go read what the directors of the agency said about the report. They were extremely critical of it, as were the republicans who served on the committee. Its a flawed report. It didnt begin to approach whats required by way of response of oversight. Does it plant any seed of doubt in you, though . No absolutely not. All of this information in here, no seed of doubt whether this worked or not . It worked. It absolutely did work. Let me ask you, what do you say to rahman . What do you say to suleman abdalla, Khalid Al Masri . All three of these folks were detained. They had these interrogation techniques used on them. They eventually were found to be innocent. They were released, no apologies, nothing. What do we owe them . What does this i mean, let me go to let me go to rahman, chained to his cell, froze with to death in cia custody. It turned out it was a case of mistaken identity. Right. But the problem i have is with all the folks that we did release that ended up back on the battlefield, the 600 and some people who were released out of guantanamo, 30 roughly ended up back on the battlefield. Today were very concerned about isis, terrible organization. It is headed by a man named baghdadi. Baghdadi was in custody of the u. S. Military in iraq in camp bucca. He was let out and now on the attack against the United States. Im more concerned with bad guys who got out and released than i am with a few that in fact, were innocent. 25 of the detainees, though. 25 turned out not to be innocent. Where are you going to draw the line, chuck . How are you going to know . Im asking you. Youre okay with that margin for error . I have no problem as long as we achieve our objective. And our objective is to get the guys who did 9 11 and to avoid another attack against the United States. I was prepared and we did, we got the authorization from the president and authorization from the Justice Department to go forward with the program. It worked. It worked now for 13 years. Weve avoided another mass casualty attack against the United States. We did capture bin laden. We did capture an awful lot of the senior guys of al qaeda who were responsible for that attack on 9 11. Id do it again in a minute. When you say waterboarding is not torture, then why did we prosecute japanese soldiers . For a lot of stuff not for waterboarding. They did an awful lot of other stuff, to draw some kind of moral equivalent between waterboarding, judged by our Justice Department not to be torture, and what the japanese did with the slaughter of thousands of americans with the rape of man king and all of the other crimes they committed. Thats an outrage. Its a really cheap shot, chuck, to even try to draw a parallel between the japanese who were prosecuted for war crimes after world war ii and what we did with waterboarding, three individuals, all of whom were guilty and participated in the 9 11 attacks. Is there a reason these interrogations didnt happen on u. S. Soil . Was there concern that maybe they would be folks would get Legal Protections from the United States and thats why it was done at black sites . We didnt read them their miranda rights either. These are not american citizens. They are unlawful combatants, terrorists. They are people who have committed unlawful acts of war against the american people. And we put them in places where we could proceed with the Interrogation Program and find out what they knew. So we could protect the country against further attacks, and it worked. Let me ask you to respond to john mccain and david petraeus. General petraeus said this to his troops. Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other methods to obtain information from the enemy. That would be wrong. Heres what senator mccain said this week. I know the use of torture compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies. Our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights which are protected by international conventions, the United States not only joined, but for the most part authored. Your reaction. My reaction is the same as Leo Thorsness who was on the air this week, captured, the pilot shot down over vietnam, held in captivity for many years, subjected to torture. This week said waterboarding is not torture. He also holds the medal of honor, as did bud day who was also captured and tortured and subsequently made it clear that he did not believe waterboarding was torture. So if an american citizen is waterboarded by isis, are we going to try to prosecute isis for war crimes . Hes not likely to be waterboarded. Hes likely to have his head cut off. Its not a close call. If another country captures a u. S. Soldier. Youre trying to come up now with hypothetical situations. The waterboarding, the way we did it, was, in fact, not torture. Now, when youre dealing with terrorists, the likes of al qaeda or isis, i havent seen them waterboard anybody. What they do is cut their heads off. What they did to 3,000 americans on 9 11, that was brutal, bloody murder. It absolutely cant be compared with what we did with respect to our enhanced Interrogation Program. In particular, it has to do with jose padilla. A memo that was prepared by the cia, use has enabled us to disrupt terrorist plots. Operative plot, padilla and mohammed planned to build and detonate a dirty bomb. This is what the Senate Democrats found. A review of cia cables and other cia records found that the use of the cias enhanced interrogation techniques played no role in the jose padilla are on the thwarting of the dirty bomb or the Tall Buildings plot. Do you feel as if they were telling you what you wanted to hear . No. Whats the implication . Well, the implication is just wrong. Again, the cia directors make it very clear that they got it wrong time after time after time. A notion that we were not notified at the white house about what was going on. I, too. I sat through a lengthy session in 04 with the Inspector General of the cia as he reviewed the state of the program at that time. The suggestion, for example, of the president didnt approve it, wrong. Thats a lie. Thats not true. We were, in fact how was he briefed . How was the president briefed . He was briefed by cia or by you . I was heavily involved as was the National Security council, condi. The president writes about it in his own book. Three pages into the book he talks about it. You were briefed directly. He was briefed indirectly most of the time. Is that fair to say . Thats not fair to say. What happened was he and i met every single morning with the director of the cia, with the National Security adviser six days a week and reviewed everything, basically, in the intelligence arena. Thats where we got most of our information. That and the written pdb. There would be special meetings from time to time on various subjects that he would be directly involved in. This man knew what we were doing. He authorized it. He approved it. A statement by the Senate Democrats, with partisan purposes, that the president didnt know what was going on. Its just a flatout lie. Its a cheap shot piece of political business that was not bipartisan, nor did it involve any discussion with the people involved in the program. Why would you even give that credence . Well, let me ask you this. Why do you not have some doubt in the cia . This is the same Intelligence Community that didnt get it right on wmds in iraq. Why are you so confident that theyre telling you the truth in these memos . Well, because i know the people involved because ive worked five out of the six former directors and deputy directors, theyre men ive known for years and trust. Intimately with the difficult problems theyve dealt with. Jose rodriguez is one of the outstanding officers in the agency. I know what they were asked to do, and i know what they did. And im perfectly comfortable that they deserve our praise. They deserve to be decorated. They dont deserve to be harassed. Can you imagine what its going to be like if you were out there now as an officer in the agency and you were undertaking a complicated, difficult, dangerous task and you have the view that ten years from now, even though the president approved it, even though the Justice Department signed off on it, some politician on Capitol Hills going to come back and want a piece of your fanny . Its an outrageous proposition that were going through here that is even being discussed. Its interesting you bring that up because theres a United Nations this is ben emerson, special envoy in human rights and counterterrorism, and he wants a criminal probe here. This is what he said. Its now time to take action. Individuals responsible, what he calls a criminal conspiracy revealed in the report must be brought to justice, must face criminal penalties, and then he ends with the u. S. Legally is obliged to bring those responsible to justice. I know how you feel on that. Do you think the president do you think the president should issue a blanket i have little respect for the United Nations, or for this individual who doesnt have a clue and had absolutely no responsibility for safeguarding this nation and going after the bastards that killed 3,000 americans on 9 11. Do you think the president should issue a blanket no crime was committed. No crime who wants to sanction or satisfy some executive at the United Nations who doesnt have any say or responsibility on a claim that some kind of pardon is required, chuck . This is again, i come back to the proposition. One of the things im really worried about is what this is doing long term. Were still at war. The terrorists out there today are as bad as it was on 9 11. Weve got isis talking about the United States having created a caliphate. Were in a situation at least as bad as we had on 9 11, when after the attack we had word that al qaeda was trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Now were sitting here today, we are castigating the cia for doing what the president ordered them to do and the Justice Department said was legal. Were doing enormous damage to our relationship overse