[Article] Bush, Cheney and Rice to testify at 9-11 commission

Sparks

From Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House said on Tuesday that the 9-11 commission agreed to terms that would allow national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to give sworn public testimony on the Sept. 11 attacks, and President Bush and Vice President Cheney to meet in private with the full panel.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters the commission had agreed to state in writing that neither appearance would set a precedent under the constitutional separation of executive and legislative powers.

After Clarke's testimony, I get the feeling this is too little, too late - but the whole "we'll talk to you, but not under oath and not in public" line is just too cynical for words. Hopefully this will come back and bite them in November along with everything else...

sovtek

Guess who's just been deemed expendable.

bonkey

I dunno about deciding that someone is expendable....

From one of the articles I saw on this off google news :

White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzales made the offer this morning in a two-page letter to Kean and Hamilton. "The Commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice," Gonzales wrote.

So, in order to get access to Rice, they must agree not to ask for Rice again, nor to even ask for any White House official to give public testimony for the remainder of the investigation.

I'm guessing that Rice will go in there and stonewall on anything which she doesn't wish to discuss that day. The tribunal will not be able to recall her, and even if she does let anything slip which might implicate the people she works with....none of them can be called as witnesses either.

Smart move. The Administration can spin that have the moral highground if the comission refuse the offer. They can virtually close up shop if the comission accepts. And unless Rice makes a complete c0ckup, she's home and dry too.

Personally, if I was on the Comission, I'd refuse such terms as unreasonable, as they demand that the Comission give up the right to do something which may - at a later stage - prove necessary in order to do its job.

jc

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

sovtek

Originally posted by daveirl
People are expecting way too much from this commission. These things have a habit of giving the response that the government setting them up want.

See Hutton, Warren..

I agree...to an extent.
While the finding of the commission is probably going to be a yawn, I have a feeling that at least some truth will be made known.
There is also the outspoken victims families who've been loud enough to be influential.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

bonkey

Originally posted by sovtek
I agree...to an extent.
While the finding of the commission is probably going to be a yawn, I have a feeling that at least some truth will be made known.

I lost a lot of faith in it when I heard Bush giving a speech about it (last night, I think).

I'm unconvinced about the pre-conditions that are laid down for Ms. Rice to appear, but even more troubling than that was Dubya's comment that he and Cheney would meet jointly with the Comission.

The whole point of meeting with the COmission is to give an individual account.

jc

sovtek

Originally posted by bonkey
I'm unconvinced about the pre-conditions that are laid down for Ms. Rice to appear, but even more troubling than that was Dubya's comment that he and Cheney would meet jointly with the Comission.
jc [/B]

An image of Dick with his hand up Jorge's backside whilst he's sitting in his lap springs to mind.