Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rice Accuses Clarke of Conflicting Stories
Myway News via Drudge ^ | Mar 24, 7:58 PM (ET) | Steve Holland

Posted on 03/24/2004 7:06:26 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

 • home | my page | my email
  .  

 news    home | top | world | intl | natl | op | pol | govt | business | tech | sci | entertain | sports | health | odd | sources

 AP • Reuters • New York Times • CBS • MSNBC • USA TODAY • FOX News • Poll • Photos

Rice Accuses Clarke of Conflicting Stories
 

Rice Accuses Clarke of Conflicting Stories
 



Mar 24, 7:58 PM (ET)

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A fuming U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice accused former counter-terrorism aide Richard Clarke on Wednesday of shifting positions from backing President Bush's war on terrorism to now questioning it.

Clarke has accused Bush of a fixation on Iraq, but Rice said Clarke did not raise those concerns with her. She said after his resignation 13 months ago, she invited him to lunch three weeks before the start of the U.S.-led war against Iraq to thank him for his years of service.

Clarke had "not a word about concerns that Iraq was going to somehow take us off the path of the war on terrorism. It would've been easy to do, kick the others out, close the door, say 'I just want you to know I think you're making a mistake.' He didn't do it," she told reporters in her West Wing office.

Rice, in normal circumstances an even-keeled top White House aide, was unusually incensed during a half-hour briefing for reporters in her West Wing office, as she castigated her former employee. She also went on television to make her case.

Her comments reflected ongoing White House frustration with Clarke, who has threatened the underpinning of Bush's re-election strategy as an activist in the war on terrorism.

Clarke has dominated news cycles this week with a book, interviews and public testimony accusing Bush of failing to act on the threat of al Qaeda before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and for being fixated on Iraq.

To underline her case that the Bush administration was acting on the threat, Rice read from a letter from Clarke on Sept. 15, 2001, in which Clarke detailed meetings from the previous June and July about preparations being taken to prepare for the possibility of a "spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack."

MEETING WITH OFFICIALS

"We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance," Clarke wrote of a July 5, 2001, meeting with FBI, Secret Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Customs, Coast Guard and Immigration officials.

The White House has gone to great lengths to try to discredit Clarke, the former White House counter-terrorism czar, by accusing him of being a disgruntled former employee who did not get a promotion and whose best friend is a foreign policy adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

Rice said Clarke's criticism expressed in his book, in a CBS "60 Minutes" interview and testimony on Capitol Hill, were directly opposite to what he told reporters in an August 2002 briefing.

Clarke said in testimony before the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks that the Bush administration considered terrorism important but not urgent, while the previous Clinton administration, for which he also served, considered it a top priority.

"There's two very different pictures here, and the fact of the matter is these stories can't be reconciled," Rice said. "Either we were ignoring the threat, or now it's changed that it was important but not urgent, or we were actually responding to the things that he actually suggested, which is what he said in the August 2002 interview."

Rice is not testifying before the 9/11 commission based on a White House principle that a presidential adviser who has not been confirmed by the U.S. Senate should not give public testimony. Commissioners are calling on her to testify.

About that call, she said: "I would like to be very clear that this is not a matter of preference. I would like nothing better than to be able to go up and do this, but I have a responsibility to maintain what is a long-standing constitutional separation between the executive and the legislative branch."

In February she spent four hours privately with the commission and said she would be available to answer more questions. "I'm prepared to spend longer with them, any where they want, any time they want, answer as many questions as they have," she said.

Rice described Clarke as a sometimes difficult employee who was "too busy" to come to some meetings she chaired until she finally demanded he appear.

"I know how to manage people, and I asked him to come once. We continued to have a problem, I asked him to come twice. We didn't have a problem after that," she said.



TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 911commission; condoleezzarice; richardclarke
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

1 posted on 03/24/2004 7:06:26 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TomGuy; Howlin; MEG33
fyi
2 posted on 03/24/2004 7:07:42 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
*BUMP*!

Once a Clintonite always a Clintonite!

3 posted on 03/24/2004 7:08:52 PM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I really would love to see someone come out and say that the Clinton Adminstration was more worried about popping the "W"s off the White House keyboards, than communicating terrorist threats or any supposed "plans" to deal with the threats.
4 posted on 03/24/2004 7:09:55 PM PST by cincinnati65 (Rooting for the Panthers since 1995.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
BUT, BUT Dr Rice didn't give her statement under OATH, like dickie did.
5 posted on 03/24/2004 7:11:56 PM PST by GailA (Kerry I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, but I'll declare a moratorium on the death penalty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
It was a big mistake for her not to testify, but the moment has passed; if she asked to go now, it would look too defensive.
6 posted on 03/24/2004 7:12:53 PM PST by Howlin (It's another good day to be a Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The article should be retitled

Rice Proves Clarke's stories are self contradicting.

What's with this accuses crap.

7 posted on 03/24/2004 7:13:57 PM PST by Tempest (Don't blame me, I'm voting for Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cincinnati65
Tonight on the Hugh Hewitt radio show, one of his guests was talking about the fact that Bill was worrying about his office space in Harlem and Hillary was trying to get her book deal done before the Senate rules prohibited her from taking the large advance. There was also no way Gore was going to cooperate, he was too busy chewing on sour grapes.
8 posted on 03/24/2004 7:16:56 PM PST by socal_parrot (Phoenix, it IS a dry heat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GailA
BUT, BUT Dr Rice didn't give her statement under OATH, like dickie did.

I've seen a couple of references to her not being under oath. Is there verification for that? I thought anyone testifying before a Commission, whether public or private, were under oath.
9 posted on 03/24/2004 7:17:49 PM PST by TomGuy (Clintonites have such good hind-sight because they had their heads up their hind-ends 8 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tempest
"as she castigated her former employee"
And... the above should read:
"As she castrated her former employee"
She's doing a pretty good job of shedding light on what he claims and what he says :).
10 posted on 03/24/2004 7:25:56 PM PST by CMOTB (The Big Bang... God said it and BANG. There it was.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
In my view, this is one woman who is WELL QUALIFIED to be President at some future time. It would be my honor and privilege to vote for her. I would love to see Dr. Rice take on this "Kangaroo Commission".
11 posted on 03/24/2004 7:27:49 PM PST by teletech (Friends don't let friends vote DemocRAT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Unfortunately Bush had to protect the basic fundamentals underlying the separation of the branches in our government and assure the presidency itself is preserved for future presidents, not just this president at this time. Counter this with Bill Clinton's extravagant legal extrapolations to try and create new "Protective Function Privelege" or any of the other myriad of different priveleges he threw at the legal system to try and protect the likes of Bruce Lindsey, Sid Blumenthal or other hit team members during his impeachment. But to see the media & liberals in full spin mode against Bush at this point, you'd never even suspect Clinton was, indeed, impeached & disbarred for perjury and obstructing justice, during the time his (Clinton) administration was supposedly spending every waking moment fighting AlQaeda (or at least when Madeline NotSoBright was clinking glasses of champagne with Kim Jong Il)
12 posted on 03/24/2004 7:29:01 PM PST by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"Clarke said in testimony before the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks that the Bush administration considered terrorism important but not urgent, while the previous Clinton administration, for which he also served, considered it a top priority."

PRECISELY the opposite of reality!! If it wasn't a higher priority for Bush, why then did he quintuple the budget right after he took office?!!?

13 posted on 03/24/2004 7:31:31 PM PST by SW6906
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
A small point, but under questioning by Jim Thompson (sp?) today, Clarke said he had voted in the Virginia Republican primary. Clarke volunteered this info apparently as part of an effort to show that he is not a Democrat stooge. I was hoping that Thompson would follow up this info (which Clarke volunteered) by asking him who he voted for in the primary. I believe he voted for McCain because if he had voted for Bush he would have said so. Likewise, in the general election, I believe Clarke voted for Gore, otherwise he would have said he voted for Bush. This may be a small point, but given that Clarke opened the door on the issue of how he votes by volunteering the information about him being a registered republican (at least for the 2000 election), I would love for someone to go back over the past three presidential elections to find out how Clarke has voted. I can guarantee to you he hasn't been voting for Republicans, otherwise Clarke would have volunteered this info in order to show his alleged impartiality.
14 posted on 03/24/2004 7:32:05 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I wondered today if she should go in front of the committee, in an unprecedented move, on Friday during Kerry's "major" economic speech. Kill two rats with one stone, so to speak.
15 posted on 03/24/2004 7:32:47 PM PST by Jodi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.
This is like a faux-impeachment, IMO.

If they can just PROVE Bush knew and lied about it, why, they can demand he resign from his ill-gotten election anyway!
16 posted on 03/24/2004 7:33:33 PM PST by Howlin (It's another good day to be a Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jodi
They aren't meeting again until April 15th, too late in my opinion.
17 posted on 03/24/2004 7:34:12 PM PST by Howlin (It's another good day to be a Republican!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
From Open Secrets we do know that Clarke's one and only campaign contribution was $2000 to a DEMOCRAT running for Congress from Missouri, of all places. He lives in Virginia.

A Republican that donates the maximum amount to a Democrat?!!?

18 posted on 03/24/2004 7:35:01 PM PST by SW6906
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Just heard on the local Fox outlet, a tape said to be Clarke, testifying after W got in office, praising Bush for immediately increasing 5 fold over Willie, our efforts against kerrorism. You won't hear it on the neocommunist media but most of the objective media should also have it tomorrow.
19 posted on 03/24/2004 7:35:48 PM PST by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tempest
This is from Reuters.
20 posted on 03/24/2004 7:37:24 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson