We must be living in some kind of alternate universe. Take a look at the video below that was carried the other day on Power Line. Democrats on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties are convinced they have an election year winner with their apparently endless investigation into the interrogation techniques employed on captured terrorists. Listen as Massachusetts Democrat John Delahunt says how delighted he is that al Qaeda will now be able to identify Vice President's chief of staff David Addington.
Here is a the text of the exchange between Delahunt and Addington.
DELAHUNT: Was waterboarding one of them?
ADDINGTON: That's what I'm answering, because I know where you're headed. As I indicated to the chairman at the beginning of this thing, I'm not in a position to talk about particular techniques, whether they are or aren't used or could or couldn't be used or their legal status.
And the reasons I would give for that, if you'll look at, I think, Exhibit 9, the president's speech of September 6, 2006, explains why he doesn't talk about what particular techniques...
DELAHUNT: Oh, I can understand why he doesn't talk about it.
ADDINGTON: But you've got to communicate with Al Qaeda. I can't talk to you. Al Qaeda may watch "C-SPAN."
DELAHUNT: Right. Well, I'm sure they are watching and I'm glad they finally have a chance to see you, Mr.
. ADDINGTON: I'm sure you're pleased.
DELAHUNT: Given your penchant for being unobtrusive.
When asked about it by FOX News, Delahunt denied it.
Delahunt told FOX News that King has "a good sense of humor" but "under no circumstances" was he implying during the hearing that Al Qaeda may target Addington."
That’s absurd. That was not my intent," he told FOX News. "And I’m sure Mr. Addington knows that was not my intent."
Delahunt said he was just trying to express that he was glad to see Addington. Delahunt said he recalls saying "I," not "they," during the testimony – though the video, broadcast on C-SPAN, shows he was talking about Al Qaeda.
In a later post Power Line reveals the story behind Delahunt's performance at the hearing.
There is a bit of a backstory here that may not have been reported. Rep. Delahunt is a member of the House Judiciary Committee, but not of the subcommittee that was holding the hearing. As such, Delahunt was not entitled to participate in the hearing, but could do so only with the unanimous consent of the members present. Delahunt was so eager to cross-examine Addington and Yoo and demonstrate his hostility to the Bush administration that he showed up and asked to question the witnesses. The subcommittee's chairman, Jerrold Nadler, asked for such consent, but Republican Steve King of Iowa refused. Delahunt stuck around, and when King left the room, another member ceded his time to Delahunt so that Delahunt could go after the witnesses. Chairman Nadler agreed, since Rep. King "didn't care enough to stay." Delahunt proceeded, and the above exchange ensued. The entire hearing was conducted in an atmosphere of poisonous partisanship, and Delahunt's suggestion that in the controversial exchange he was merely trying to be cordial toward Addington is laughable.
By his denial of what we can clearly hear him say on the video, Delahunt shows that he's at least bright enough to figure out that his remarks were way out of line. But isn't it remarkable that in his gut reaction he figured on winning political points by taking the side of al Qaeda.
Comments