Don’t Forget Halliburton & Libby: Put them in Context
Chris is right that the major sin is Cheney signing off on torture. However, Halliburton and Libby form part of the context of Cheney’s view that laws, presidential directives, subpoenas, and the Constitution itself, do not apply to him. The theme is lawlessness.
Among the great ironies of the Cheney Administration (He is, after all, his own unique branch of government, being, he claims, neither wholly executive nor wholly legislative) is that for a self-proclaimed conservative, he breaks most of the key values of classical conservatives. He is a moral relativist, believing that if he believes it is good, it is good. If he believes it serves his interests, it is permissible—maybe even mandatory. He is a Jacques Derrida follower in the extreme having deconstructed the meaning of the Constitution and re-assembled it to say what he believes. There is no objective truth, only opportunities to advance what he believes are in his, therefore President Bush’s and therefore the nation’s interests.
Torture? Well, it isn’t torture if he doesn’t believe it’s torture. Discomfort? Okay. Distress? Fine. Fear? Of course. You can bend the prisoner, strain the muscles and ligaments, and if a bone breaks, well, accidents happen. It should be fine, so long as you didn’t intend to break the bone. Intent is everything. Law is nothing.
No records. No memos. No compliance. No accountability. But there is a pattern.