Why Condi Rice had to lie, to evade, to avoid testifying under oath in the 9/11 hearings.

[CaptnKirk]

There is no way to educate those who are unwilling to learn.

With that said read these 2 op-eds from the New York Times.
(And no, I'm not going to 'Clip' them - just register - it's free)

The Wrong Target
The Wrong War

2 wrongs don't make a right, but three do ?

Rice Bluster and Bulnders
(L.A. Times)

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

then what does she have to hide and why is she afraid of the truth to come out?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

Again the Book was held up for over a year by the White Housae Lawyers as they examined it to make sure than no state secrets were being revealed. The coincidence of the timing of it's release is being useed by the Dub's Attack Machine to try and discredit Clarke and draw attention away from his criticisms from the perspective of an insider in the Dub's Administration.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

Again the Book was held up for over a year by the White Housae Lawyers as they examined it to make sure than no state secrets were being revealed. The coincidence of the timing of it's release is being useed by the Dub's Attack Machine to try and discredit Clarke and draw attention away from his criticisms from the perspective of an insider in the Dub's Administration.

Link to that about the White House lawyers? I haven't saw that tidbit yet.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

then what does she have to hide and why is she afraid of the truth to come out?

We are seriously going in circles. Who says she is hiding anything but classified info? I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here. But then again... if you have nothing to hide why don't you let the police come into your house as you please? Sure that is on an individual level, but what is wrong with her testifying in private. Can't they publicize what she says? I know she was taking executive privlege, but still.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

then what does she have to hide and why is she afraid of the truth to come out?

We are seriously going in circles. Who says she is hiding anything but classified info? I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here. But then again... if you have nothing to hide why don't you let the police come into your house as you please? Sure that is on an individual level, but what is wrong with her testifying in private. Can't they publicize what she says? I know she was taking executive privlege, but still.

if I was part of an investigation and I had nothing to hide then yes I would, if I had something to hide I would not

then why hasnt she even testified under oath?

 

[chess9]

Mill:

She is really avoiding testimony under oath, and probably doesn't care a whit about the public testimony aspect. Her fear is that she might say something that could be construed as PERJURY. Already Porter Goss is claiming that Clarke committed perjury, so it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine the Dems calling for Rice's prosecution. Why do you think Rice is walking around looking like the Sword of Damocles is about to fall on her head? That is one worried woman....

-Robert

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

Again the Book was held up for over a year by the White Housae Lawyers as they examined it to make sure than no state secrets were being revealed. The coincidence of the timing of it's release is being useed by the Dub's Attack Machine to try and discredit Clarke and draw attention away from his criticisms from the perspective of an insider in the Dub's Administration.

Link to that about the White House lawyers? I haven't saw that tidbit yet.

I don't have a link Mill, sorry about that. I heard a few times while it was being discussed on numerous News Talk TV shows like Hannity and Colmes

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Governor of CA, Senator from CA, Vice President . . . to a great big ZERO.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: chess9
Mill:

She is really avoiding testimony under oath, and probably doesn't care a whit about the public testimony aspect. Her fear is that she might say something that could be construed as PERJURY. Already Porter Goss is claiming that Clarke committed perjury, so it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine the Dems calling for Rice's prosecution. Why do you think Rice is walking around looking like the Sword of Damocles is about to fall on her head? That is one worried woman....

-Robert

Can't wait to hear her tell-all book.

 

[chess9]

Conjur:

If I had to guess, I'd say she'll have a nervous breakdown before she ever gets to write it. She likes to put out a tough exterior, but you know the pressure has got to be KILLING HER! She's in a pressure cooker and the temperatue is 10K C and the pressure is 100K lbs per sq. inch and THE WHOLE WORLD IS WATCHING.

I'm amazed the whole thing hasn't exploded already.

Who would want to be Rice?
-Robert

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: chess9
Check out today's picture of Rice on CNN. I swear they are KILLING HER! She is dead, smelly meat and will have almost zero credibility henceforth if she doesn't reverse course quickly. The only recourse is public testimony under oath.

-Robert

What exactly is public testimony going to prove. I'm just wondering what secret you think she is going to let out.

If it's a secret how would he know about it?

Well how does he know there is a secret then? Seems like we are going to go in circles here. Every report I've read has mentioned that Clarke waited until his book came out and that this was all timed pretty conveniently. If the Bush's admin stinks about the Iraq mess, then this whole hearing stinks pretty bad too. Well, at least as far as Clarke is concerned.

Again the Book was held up for over a year by the White Housae Lawyers as they examined it to make sure than no state secrets were being revealed. The coincidence of the timing of it's release is being useed by the Dub's Attack Machine to try and discredit Clarke and draw attention away from his criticisms from the perspective of an insider in the Dub's Administration.

yes, its amazing how blatantly the bush machine lies. delay a mans book and then attack him on the release date you engineered? no scruples at all.

 

[conjur]

Is Condoleezza Rice now going to be on 60 Minutes tomorrow???

 

[conjur]

Apparently not. Not hearing any more about it.

But, John Kerry did weigh in today with this comment:

"If Condoleezza Rice can find time to do '60 Minutes' on television before the American people, she ought to find 60 minutes to speak to the commission under oath," Kerry told reporters, referring to Rice's scheduled appearance Sunday night on the CBS news program. "We're talking about the security of our country."

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: conjur
Apparently not. Not hearing any more about it.

But, John Kerry did weigh in today with this comment:

"If Condoleezza Rice can find time to do '60 Minutes' on television before the American people, she ought to find 60 minutes to speak to the commission under oath," Kerry told reporters, referring to Rice's scheduled appearance Sunday night on the CBS news program. "We're talking about the security of our country."

And Kerry knows or should know that it is not the matter of time that is keeping Rice from testifying. He should also know that she is talking to the commission again.

Kerry lie or just democratic politicking?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

And Kerry knows or should know that it is not the matter of time that is keeping Rice from testifying. He should also know that she is talking to the commission again.

Actually it's a matter of being under oath and/or doing it in public. Clearly it is not an issue of executive privilege b/c she's been talking to anyone that will listen for the past week.

And my understanding is that the commission is discussing further Rice visits b/c they are not enthused about her continued demand for testifying without swearing to tell to the truth. I'm willing to wager that if the commission insists she swear an oath then Rice will decline. At a minimum, many on the commission will at least insist her testimony be public. I would love to see a Rice, Berger, and Clarke on a panel together.

 

[conjur]

Nope...it's Bush political B.S.

There is precedent that would allow Condoleezza Rice to testify. And, given the gravity of this hearing, she most definitely should.

She still refuses to testify under oath. Why???

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur
And, given the gravity of this hearing, she most definitely should.

Ah yes... the old "seriousness of the charge" thing again...

I laugh every time I hear that. It's the TRUTH that matters - not the charge or the seriousness of a charge.

Meh - I really don't care if it's public or not - if she feels that things have been misrepresented publicly then she can try to make sure the commision knows it. The fact is - this commision has turned into a political circus when it should be about trying to figure out how we can make address future threats without making the mistakes that lead up to the 9/11 attacks slipping through our intelligence ranks. But again it is a political season so one has to take those issues into account when looking at this issue.

CkG

 

[etech]

Yes, the democrats are doing a wonderful job of politicizing the tragedy of 9/11.

I hope they are proud of themselves.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: etech
Yes, the democrats are doing a wonderful job of politicizing the tragedy of 9/11.

I hope they are proud of themselves.

No, they aren't.

Bush did that when he deceived us to go to war in Iraq for his political and personal reasons.

 

[etech]

The democrats are turning 9/11 into a political circus. Who will be the next to throw out some unfounded charges. Who will Kerry say should testify next? The commission is about finding out what went wrong and democrats are turning all into just a political ploy.

It's a shame.

 

[conjur]

Then why were the Republicans asking politically-oriented questions of Clarke in the 9/11 hearings?