Condi Rice to testify--in public and under oath. . .
 

Breaking news on CNN.com. Well, this ought to be interesting. Wonder when it suddenly became alright for her to testify?

Polling suggested it would be a wise thing. But, W is rising in the polls according to all major news sources. Then again K has been on vacation and undergoing surgery.

That's mighty generous of her.

- Jake

CNN/USA Today has Bush rising. Rasmussen and Zogby both have Kerry in front.:)
I fully expect Dr. Rice to lie her ass off. Hope they nail her.

Evidently it doesn't seem to matter much to the American people that the Bush facists get caught in lie after lie. Dubya is gaining against Kerry as the Republican thugs continue to paint Kerry as a tax-and-spend liberal:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/...ain/index.html

How they could make the tax-and-spend charge stick at this point is beyond me, considering the economic mess the Bush cadre has gotten us in.

:nod: :nod: :nod:

After her public displays this last week, I have no respect for the woman. I didn't have much before this, but now? What a cold and calculating sow. :nod:

See, this is the thing that I just don't understand. How many times has the Bush administration flip-flopped under public pressure in just the last couple of months alone? The economy is in the toilet, and it seems like every other job in this country is being outsourced, and to top it all off, gas prices are skyrocketing. Meanwhile, we've got hundreds of innocent Americans dying in Iraq in a war which was begun under less than truthful pretexts by the Bush administration. And yet he's still this high up in the polls? WTF is that about? Are these people asleep or just stupid? I'm not that wild about Kerry either but he's got to be a damn sight better than what we've got in there now!

May I add cold, calculating, GAP TOOTHED sow ?
Hated it last year when Oprah was kissing Rice's sorry butt. I love me some Oprah, but that made me a little suspicious.

it's all a distraction, imho..
 

should Condi testify under oath in public? Absolulety. And so should President Clinton, President Bush, Gore, Cheney, etc. Something as horrific as 9/11 deserves complete transparancy, and I say start at the top.

Condi Rice is too bright to perjure herself, so I think she'll be honest, although she will choose her words carefully. Something that is getting lost in this whole media driven story are some of the findings of the 9/11 commission that have been released.

Instead, we focus on Clarke's credibility and Rice's public under oath testimony. I once again shake my head at the American press for not making some of the findings of the commission more relevant in their reporting.

Some of the commission's findings have not been too flattering for both the Bush and Clinton Administrations, and since there is quite a bit of evidence before the committee, Rice will not take the risk under oath. Like I said, she will choose her words wisely.

It should be interesting. I'll be watching.

Re: it's all a distraction, imho..
 

She's not bright enough to stop contradicting herself with every new television appearance. First she said that Clarke wasn't a part of most meetings, then she said he was involved in all of them two days later. Then, she says that he didn't do a very good job and wasn't aggressive enough in his terror plans. Three days later, she says that his plans were brilliant and he was very hands on. She's a major part of ChimpCo, of course she'll perjure herself. Do any of us actually think that she'll say *anything* that's even somewhat negative about the admin? Hell no. She's going to get up there and say that everything was done to prevent terrorism. The same old ****. Typical Republican...now begins the cover-up.

If Richard Clarke is as big a liar as they're making him out to be, why won't they declassify the emails and letters that he asked to be made public? Because they just support what he's been saying. Also, no one is even mentioning that his story is almost exactly like O'Neill's.

:wavey:

Re: it's all a distraction, imho..
 

ITA agree.

Moreover, I think Rice's 60 Minutes interview was her chance to spin it before millions of 60 minute watchers. I think she is far to bright to attempt to lie under oath, esp. when she does not have to in that everyone already knows what she is going to say because she said it Sun. night. But, we shall see.

Interestingly, everyone knows W's WH dropped the ball in that they did not connect the dots and no one seems to fault them for that. So it is sort of a tempest in a teapot unless she drops a bombshell, which I can assure you she is rehearsing right now to avoid doing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/03/op...03SAT1.html?th

The Mystery Deepens

Published: April 3, 2004


The Bush administration's handling of the bipartisan commission investigating the 9/11 tragedy grows worse — and more oddly self-destructive — with each passing day. Following its earlier attempts to withhold documents from the panel and then to deny its members vital testimony, we now learn that President Bush's staff has been withholding thousands of pages of Clinton administration papers as well.

Bill Clinton authorized the release of nearly 11,000 pages of files on his administration's antiterrorism efforts for use by the commission. But aides to Mr. Clinton said the White House, which now has control of the papers, vetoed the transfer of over three-quarters of them. The White House held the documents for more than six weeks, apparently without notifying the commission, and might have kept them indefinitely if Bruce Lindsey, the general counsel of Mr. Clinton's presidential foundation, had not publicly complained this week. Yesterday the commission said the White House had agreed to allow its lawyers to review the withheld documents, but without guaranteeing any would be released.

This latest distressing episode followed the White House's pattern of resisting the commission in private and then, once the dispute becomes public, reluctantly giving up the minimum amount of ground. Earlier in the week, Mr. Bush finally agreed to allow Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, to testify under oath — but only after extracting a commitment that the commission would not seek any further public testimony from any White House official. After months of foot-dragging, Mr. Bush also grudgingly agreed to let the panel question him and Vice President Dick Cheney privately. Last year the Pentagon, the Justice Department and other agencies stonewalled the commission's requests for documents until its chairman, Thomas Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey, complained publicly.

Explaining the latest act of obstruction, Scott McClellan, the president's spokesman, said on Thursday that some documents were duplicative, unrelated or "highly sensitive." The White House, he said, had given the commission "all the information they need." Mr. Bush's staff should not be making that judgment. The commission's 10 members can be trusted with sensitive material.

Moreover, given the repeated criticism of this administration's obsessive secrecy on other issues, it is astonishing that it would still withhold anything that did not pose an immediate and dire threat to national security. The American people would like to know that they have a government that freely gives information to legitimate investigations on matters of grave national interest, not one that fights each reasonable request until it is exposed and forced to submit. The White House is serving no public purpose by acting less interested than the rest of us in having this commission do its vital work. Its ham-handed behavior is also gravely damaging the entire concept of executive privilege

Re: it's all a distraction, imho..
 

These are the same People who stole an election, lied to the American people about WMD's and uranium to lead us into an illegal war which they had been planning all along. They outed the identity of a CIA agent when they thought her husband would blow the whistle on them. Our vice president conducted secret meetings with an energy task force and won't tell the American people what they talked about. He's now being sued for it and one of the Supreme Court Justices goes on Air Force Two on a duck hunting trip with him but refuses to recuse himself from the case. The same vice president's former employer, of which he was an officer and whom he is still being paid by, is awarded lucrative no bid contracts for a variety of services here and in Iraq. They're brazen liars. I see no reason why they would conduct themselves any differently in this situation.
And yes, people have a right to know how this could have happened to us. But do you honestly think we're going to get a straight answer from this crew?
Condoleeza Rice is an expert on the Cold War. However when it comes to the Middle East, she was grossly underqualified for the role of National Security Advisor. They were told and told again, Islamic jihadists were our biggest threat, not Poland, Czechoslovokia or Russia.

Tomorrow should be an interesting day.

:rolleyes:

They'll have to play fake appaulse for her like they did for Shrub at that baseball game. ;)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...=584&e=9&u=/nm ...

White House Refuses Panel Request for Rice Speech
By Adam Entous

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House has refused to provide the panel investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks with a speech national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was to deliver on that day touting missile defense as a priority rather than al Qaeda, sources said on Tuesday.

The White House said it was cooperating with the investigation. "The White House is working with the commission to ensure that it has access to what it needs to do its job," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said.

The Washington Post, citing former U.S. officials, reported last week that the speech was designed to promote missile defense as the cornerstone of a new national security strategy (reflecting "the intellectual underpinnings for the administration's pre-9/11 neglect of counterterrorism") , and contained no mention of al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden, or Islamic extremist groups.

Under pressure, the White House let commission staff review the Clinton papers at the National Archives. A commission official said on Tuesday that staff members had completed their review and that the panel may request some of the documents.

BRING IT ON

Go Condi!!! :)

I agree. I think she has nothing to fear in that she will say nothing new and she did damage control so to speak by going on 60 minutes last week, which is a friendlier forum than this panel can be.

All in all, I think the WH through CR should say, look the Fed. Agencies had the info. but we never put it together. Moreover, clearly we knew Al-Q was a threat but were caught with our pants down - period. We are humbled by that and apologizeto the people we failed. BUT, we have learned from that and are doing everything we can never to let it happen again.

I think if she said that, it would all roll off her back like water on a duck. :cool:

OMG - she is getting grilled unmercifully about the Aug. 6, 2001 PDB memo, apparently and although it clearly suggested only a general Al-Q threat, it is somewhat of a smoking gun regarding what W knew and what CR told W. This grey haired guy is just letting her have it and she is getting somewhat frazzeled. Bad move on her part.

They are not declassifying the 8/6/01 PDB in its entirety - another bad move on W's part.

Moreover, she is not being contrite - another bad move.

Finally, the audience, filled with 9/11 widows, etc., is clearly out for her blood and are applauding the unmerciful grilling.

This is not boding well for CR.

But, it is not over.

She's dancing all over the place. I think she's told one bold faced lie already. Hope they can prove it. It's turning into a bit of a disaster. CNN is streaming it live. Sorry I don't have the link.

Kerrey is grilling her. She should not have a limit on the time of her testimony.

I agree. I think she's coming off sympathetically in this part.

BTW, I keep forgetting how young she is. She looks older.

- Jake

In one way, I feel sorry for her. She is put in the place of having to explain in hindsight the errors of many people from different agencies who never met and even if they did could they have made sense of these general threats, etc.

But, the buck stops with her.

In the end, I do not think that given the state of mind of the US, the general threats at issue, and the sheer number of general threats received everyday and never happen - there was a feasible way to prevent 9/11 no matter who was at the helm.

Wow, they're out for blood. This is as bad as Shrub's SOTU speech. :nod:

She's getting very frazzled and sharp, this is not going to bode well for her. She's just speaking one contradiction after another, though. Around 9:30, she said that they had no knowledge that planes would have anything to do with an attack, then she said that the air safety agencies were alerted immmediately five minutes afterwards. She's toast.

Wow, he spoke in tongues on the Mirage Tour?:eek: :cool:

- Jake

:laugh: I don't know about that, but Condi's doing a good job of bungling some of her answers to the point where they make less sense than Stevie's coked-out rambling. :nod:

Don't forget the panty revealing and listing spin!!! :laugh:

:cool:

:eek: :eek: :eek:

Listen to Roemer talking to Condi right now! OMG, vicious! :laugh:

They are just nailing her to the wall.

Hey, if you run with dogs, you're gonna get bit.

Holy ****.

Howard Fineman, of all people, was just on Franken and he even said that todays testimony will be poison for Bush. Fineman's one of the biggest ChimpCo apologists out there and he said her testimony calls Shrub's leadership and credibility into serious question. Namely, his month long vacation...and the Aug. 6 memo...

Has the 8/6/06 memo. been released in full?

Holy ****, again.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/20.../index_np.html

Clarke looks more and more like an honest man, folks.

Not to my knowledge. :laugh:

Clark's biggest credibility threat is that he supported W in public on more than one occasion and in writing. But, I do believe him. Moreover, I think W is taking the stupid position of deny, deny, deny and smile until it blows over. Again, W should say, they made a mistake and they are trying to make sure it never happens again. CR came close to saying that today but refused to admit she got caught in the fighting between the CIA and the FBI.

Dubya's problem is that if he's going to say that, he's going to wait until closer to the election and it's going to hurt him pretty badly. So, I hope he does. ;)

And Kerry will be on Franken tomorrow at noon.

This is what really bugs me about what Rice testified to:

She said that in the memo, there wasn't anything that told of who, when, where, and how the US would be attacked. Well, what the f*ck were they waiting for? Were they waiting for something to happen before they shook their "trees"? No, you shake all the "trees" that you can to find out that stuff! You don't just sit back and cry ignorance!

Then she said that she couldn't remember whether or not she told the president that there were Al-Q cells IN THE FREAKIN' UNITED STATES!!!! Then she tells Ben-Veniste that the title of the PDB was "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" and that in the memo, it said "the FBI indicates patterns of suspicious activity in the United States consistent with preparations for hijacking"!!!!

What blatant contradictions!!!

Then she said that they believed that responding to the USS Cole bombing would "embolden" the terrorists! Bin Laden was expecting a response to it and that they didn't want to acknowledge the bombing, is what she said! This admin was investigating it and they knew that Bin Laden was responsible, but they wanted nothing to do with it! "Tit for tat" my fat ass.

This chick was unbelievable.

BUMP ;)

No. It will never be released publicly.

I wonder if CR meant to read the title like she did? I mean the title, if not previously released, on its own certainly did not support her position.