Dems playing with fire

Boston Herald ^ | 3/31/04 | Boston Herald editorial staff

[kattracks]

The White House has just given Democratic partisans, on and off the Sept. 11 commission, enough rope with which to hang themselves.
     National security adviser Condoleezza Rice will testify publicly under oath before the national Sept. 11 commission, and the whole commission will meet, without time constraints, with President Bush [related, bio] and Vice President Dick Cheney.
     But the public will only tolerate so much political posturing related to the Sept. 11 attacks. If Democrats take advantage of the administration's cooperation to score political points in this election year, it's John Kerry's, not Bush's, campaign which will be harmed.

[goldstategop]

You wish... these people can't help themselves. They have no grace. For them its all about getting back into power.

[GeronL]

The media and the Democrats have been begging for this, they have been demanding it. They are going to regret they ever heard of Condi Rice.

[good1]

I believe that this is a mistake for these reasons:

1.She doesn't have anything new to tell. What can she say that she hasn't already said in her previous 4 hours of testimony?

2.The Democrats will not ask her any questions she can answer. They will craft their questions so that she must reply that to answer would betray state secrets, which the Dems will distort to mean that she is still hiding some information.

3.Her testimony is unnecessary to show that Clarke is lying. His own words show that he is telling 2, or more, different stories. What can Miss Rice say that will convince the Dems that she is telling the truth and that Clarke is lying? Having one under oath does not guarantee the truth will come out.

A better strategy would be to have the commission submit, in writing, the questions they have for Miss Rice. Then, she will answer them, in writing, after the fashion of a formal deposition (which, I think, is a written statement under oath). If I have used the wrong term here for a written statement that has the same import or value as a spoken statement under oath, please correct me.

This approach will prevent the Dems from pushing her into a corner from which she cannot extricate herself by asking her questions they know she cannot, or will not, answer.

The written question format will enable all to see just where the commission is trying to go. Further, if the "American people" have a right hear Miss Rice's testimony, we also have a right to hear the questions they intend to ask her. It is unwise to enter a pit of snakes unarmed or uninformed. It is plain that she will find no friends among the Republicans on the commission, for if they were they would not have sided with the Democrats in compelling her to testify beyond private sessions.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

I heard on one of the talking head shows last night that when Condi Rice testified for four hours at the 911 Commission only 5 of the 10 commissioners were present.

This entire Clarke vs. Condi story is a media concoction designed to distract attention away from Clinton's failed legacy on terrorism.

[JimVT]

They are going to regret they ever heard of Condi Rice.

I hope she puts Ben-Veniste in his place

[tagatose]

They tried the written Q&A with Pickering but you see how far that went.

[Radix]

I have the strong sense that the Condoleeza Rice testimony is going to make the democrats sorry that they ever even thought of it. As if.

This is beginning to look very much like the call for a vote on a resolution to into Iraq. The democrats wanted that vote all summer in 2002. They finally got to vote on it, and then they realized how much they had been played. They simply will not learn, and they will regret it, again.

[goldstategop]

The Democrats aren't interested in the truth; they're interested in ammo they can find to use against President Bush in an election year.

[good1]

No, I didn't know that. What happened? If the Dems don't have anything to hide, what's the problem with submitting written questions?

I think the number one reason for the commission is to defend and acquit Clinton of any responsibility for the terrorist attacks of 9/11.

[The Wizard]

they're starting to get it

[goldstategop]

I agree. The Democrats haven't wised up to Dubya's "rope-a-dope" tactics. They think he's too dim-witted to get the better of them and they get really angry when they find they've been had by someone they regard as too stupid to be President.

[goldstategop]

LOL! Sure - Richard Clarke was a flop and now they're praying Bob Woodward will turn things around for them.

[kattracks]

they're starting to get it.

I think they'll get it with both barrels.

The Dims have put Condi's testimony on the front page. Now there'll be no way of ignoring what she says.

[goldstategop]

They always let the door hit them on the nose. The Democrats should really pipe down instead of handing their opposition the chainsaw. Pinging Terry McAwful...

[CatoRenasci]

A deposition is the oral questioning of an individual under oath.

Written questions answered under oath are called interrogatories.

[AntiGuv]

Personally, I doubt that anything Condi says will be of all that great interest or political impact. Quite to the contrary, the most important thing I think it does is remove the entire spectacle from the front pages for now.

[rrrod]

more than likely you are correct...but wouldnt it be nice to see condi drop a bombshell at the hearings!

[alnick]

Well, we all know one thing that will happen for sure. The media will select one or two clips which will make Dr. Rice look bad, even if they have to do some editing, and play it over and over and over again until we all have it memorized.

[Agnes Heep]

The White House has just given Democratic partisans, on and off the Sept. 11 commission, enough rope with which to hang themselves.

I hope it's a short drop. I want to see them dance.