White House Agrees to Public Rice Testimony on 9/11

[IJ Reilly]

I like the spin: "I caved out of principle."

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) reversed course under heavy pressure on Tuesday and agreed to let his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites), give sworn public testimony before the Sept. 11 commission.

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney (news - web sites) also agreed to meet together privately with the full panel, abandoning their earlier insistence that they would meet only with the commission's chairman and vice chairman.

Rice was likely to testify toward the end of next week, with Bush and Cheney following sometime after that, a senior administration official said.

The dramatic about-face came in a White House letter to the panel that said Rice would appear in public if it was agreed it would not set a precedent under the constitutional separation of executive and legislative powers.

"We have observed this principle while also seeking ways for Dr. Rice to testify so that the public record is full and accurate," Bush told reporters in a statement after months of White House resistance to calls for public testimony by Rice.

"I've ordered this level of cooperation because I consider it necessary to gaining a complete picture of the months and years that preceded the murder of our fellow citizens."

The president made no reference to his impending appearance before the commission with Cheney. He did not take questions.

[...]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=1&u=/nm/20040330/pl_nm/security_rice_dc

[zimv20]

it's a good choice. now i can only hope that the process of declassifying the richard clarke emails, etc. will mean they're *all* declassified, not just the ones that benefit the bush administration.

[miloblithe]

I was hoping she wouldn't testify as that would look bad for the administration. Hopefully her testimony will be even more incriminating than her silence.

[zimv20]

I was hoping she wouldn't testify as that would look bad for the administration. Hopefully her testimony will be even more incriminating than her silence.
i understand the sentiment, but i'm really more interested in just figuring out the friggin' truth. not that i expect ms. rice to be forthcoming in that regard, but any moves towards a more transparent gov't i'm in favor of.

i'll again note the idea of declassifying all of clarke's communications. that goes for ms. rice's, too. ALL of it.

[miloblithe]

I agree that more transparency in government is good, and it would be good to know more about what went on. On the other hand, in an election year, unfortunately, prinicples take a back seat.

[mactastic]

Did anyone else notice what the WH got in return? The blessing of having Bush AND Cheney testify together. Now there will be no chance to compare their testimony against each others, a common legal practice when trying to determine the truth. Whoever has the stronger answer will step forward to answer, with Cheney fielding the majority of the questions I imagine.

On the plus side, it must have been a crappy day to be a right-wing conservative radio talk show host, trying to explain away a week or so of harping on the principle of seperation of powers. I'm sure they blamed 'the liberals' for the presidents flip-flop. Of course this is only the latest in a long line of flip-flops when it comes to the 9/11 commission.

[miloblithe]

It's pretty pathetic that our President needs his hand held by the vice-president while being interviewed by a commission that he picked out. There is no question that this defies common legal practice and is a major concession for getting to interview Rice.

[zimv20]

Now there will be no chance to compare their testimony against each others, a common legal practice when trying to determine the truth.
i'm not sure why you're so concerned about the truth not coming out. don't you recall what bush said when he formed the commission?

"This investigation should carefully examine all the evidence and follow all the facts, wherever they lead," said Bush, whose administration initially opposed the commission.

"We must uncover every detail and learn every lesson of September the 11th," Bush said.

link (http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/11/27/intelligence.probe/index.html)

[IJ Reilly]

Another reminder: Originally, Bush had only agreed to give the 9-11 commission an hour of his time. He had to be shamed into indulging the commission's request for more, he had to be shamed into allowing Rice to testify publicly, he even had to be shamed into agreeing to the commission in the first place. It's so apparent that he's going kicking and screaming every step of the way on this. All of which raises an obvious question: why?

[vwcruisn]

ive said it before, and ill say it again. how bush's approval ratings stay high, ill never understand. I know poll numbers arent always accurate... but cmon america. pull the blinders off :eek:

[3rdpath]

Did anyone else notice what the WH got in return? The blessing of having Bush AND Cheney testify together.

how else could cheney work the puppet?
;)

[IJ Reilly]

I was reading this article in the LA Times this morning and thinking to myself, why does George Bush have such a remarkably tin ear? Then I thought of the quote (from Molly Ivins?) about Bush being born on third base and thinking he hit a triple. Now I don't usually go in for amateur psychology but after watching GWB's behavior for over three years now, and seeing in particular his complete inability to admit fault, I'd have to call him a classic case of the silver spoon syndrome. I think it takes someone raised a spoiled rich kid to think that everyone should step aside when he's coming through.

This Time, Backers Glad Bush Yielded
By Janet Hook
Times Staff Writer

March 31, 2004

WASHINGTON — President Bush is famous for digging in his heels when the powers of his office could be compromised, a trait that supporters cite as evidence of his strong leadership.

But some of his most loyal supporters — Republicans in Congress — were relieved Tuesday when Bush gave in on what he had once said was a legal and constitutional principle of the highest order.

By allowing his national security advisor to testify in public and under oath before the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, they said, Bush had finally addressed a growing political liability.

For Republicans who feared political fallout from the protracted struggle, the only question was: What took him so long?

Bush risked looking like an enemy of openness in the investigation, due to his insistence on invoking his legal power to block Condoleezza Rice's testimony, some Republicans said. "They had a blind eye to the political implications of what they were doing," said Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.). "Lawyers have a way of keeping you out of jail, but making you look guilty."

The controversy tapped into a signature feature of Bush's leadership style: He tends to stick to his guns on core issues even beyond the point where other Republicans would cave.

"You could make a case that one of Bush's greatest strengths, which is resolve in leadership, can also be a weakness at times: My way or the highway," said a Republican strategist who works with the White House.

The controversy fueled frustration among Republicans in Congress, who have been whipsawed before by the White House's stubborn refusal to give ground on politically sensitive issues.

For example, Bush fought creation of the Department of Homeland Security for months before embracing the idea, which had almost unstoppable momentum after the attacks on New York and the Pentagon. He opposed creation of the independent Sept. 11 commission in the first place, then endorsed the idea when its passage seemed inevitable.

Those episodes generated some resentment among Republicans in Congress, who felt the White House had pulled the rug out from under them after they had defended Bush's unpopular positions.

[...]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-assess31mar31,1,7443814.story

[3rdpath]

i think the " born on third" quote was by jim hightower.

having crossed paths with gwb a few times in my youthful dallas days...he's always had the attitude and smirk...like he'd actually accomplished something besides being a member of the lucky sperm club.

[IJ Reilly]

i think the " born on third" quote was by jim hightower.

having crossed paths with gwb a few times in my youthful dallas days...he's always had the attitude and smirk...like he'd actually accomplished something besides being a member of the lucky sperm club.

Right, as reported by Molly Ivins. GWB could be the poster child for inheritance taxes.

[wwworry]

Did any of you hear the radio report about the campaign work he did in Alabama when he was supposed to be in the reserves? They said he was a glad hander and usually showed up at the office around noon and left at 5. Everyone else came in early in the morning. His conversation starter was always how much he had to drink the night before. Frat boy.

[wwworry]

Did you hear that in exchange for having Rice testify under oath now Bush and Cheney will get to testify together, not under oath (OK to lie?) and no other administration officials will have to testify.

Why do they want to prevent us from the truth? What information do they want to hide from us?

[mactastic]

Did you hear that in exchange for having Rice testify under oath now Bush and Cheney will get to testify together?

Yes we did....

[IJ Reilly]

"Under oath" is a bit of a technicality, since it's a felony to lie to a Congressional investigation in any case. The testifying together bit to so they can keep their stories straight, which in a way, is even more cynical then lying, IMO.

[wwworry]

I just find it disheartening (disgusting, dismaying, unbelievable etc.) that in order to get to the truth of a matter of national importance they have to have some sort of exchange or gift. It's like they are little babies.