To: TimPatriot
If Rumsfeld testifies, Rice should testify. Looks bad, and somewhat chicken if she aspires to VP or even senator.
19 posted on
03/24/2004 3:22:45 AM PST by
tkathy
(Our economy, our investments, and our jobs DEPEND on powerful national security.)
To: tkathy
It is something to do with the fact that she did not have to be confirmed by the Senate,,Executive privilege and not wanting to set a precedent.Slate Gorton,I saw in an article said she was terrific when she testified 4 hours behind closed doors and wished she would testify publically.
26 posted on
03/24/2004 3:33:12 AM PST by
MEG33
(John Kerry's been AWOL for two decades on issues of National Security!)
To: tkathy
She HAS testified before this committee for four and one-half hours (private session, and UNDER OATH). A public appearance would be little more than a "dog and pony" show, and another chance to rail the kerry line (once again) against the administration.
You may not respect the separation of powers doctrine, but the President must preserve this right for future Presidents.
LLS
28 posted on
03/24/2004 3:46:01 AM PST by
LibLieSlayer
(We point out Kerry's record and the facts, and they just THINK it's attack politics.)
To: tkathy
Rice did testify.
43 posted on
03/24/2004 4:28:26 AM PST by
alnick
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson