White House Requests Another Private Meeting Between National Security Advisor Rice, 9-11 Commission

Voice of America ^ | Mar 25, 2004 | Paula Wolfson

[TaxRelief]

The White House is making an all out effort to counter criticism of President Bush's handling of the war on terrorism from a former top member of his national security team.

Richard Clarke's criticism has clearly hit a raw nerve at the White House. And now, even the president is speaking out.

Mr. Clarke, who served as White House counterterrorism coordinator until about a year ago, charges the president ignored the threat from al-Qaida prior to the September 11 terrorist attacks and instead was fixated on Iraq.

The allegations first appeared in a new book that hit stores on Monday, and made him the center of attention Wednesday when he appeared before the independent commission investigating the attacks.

President Bush took note of the commission hearing, and inserted comments about the panel in remarks prepared for delivery Thursday at an event in New Hampshire originally set up to call attention to his economic policies.

"Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to strike America, to attack us, I would have used every resource, every asset, and every power of this government to protect the American people," he said.

A few hours later came another sign of White House concern over Richard Clarke's testimony - an indication of the administration's determination to make sure its side of the story is heard and understood by the American people.

The president's chief legal counsel sent a letter to the commission, asking if White House national security advisor Condoleezza Rice could meet in private once again with the panel. In the letter, Alberto Gonzales said she wanted to clear up, what he termed, a number of mischaracterizations.

The offer falls short of demands from some commission members. They have already met with her once behind closed doors for four hours and say they want her to testify publicly and under oath.

In the letter to the commission, the White House counsel noted that top presidential advisors never, as a rule, testify before commissions created by Congress. He said that is especially true in the national security area, where much of the advice provided is, and should remain, confidential.

During an interview with NBC television, Mr. Gonzales also noted that legally it is not necessary for Condoleezza Rice to testify under oath. He said White House officials are already required to tell the truth.

"This is not a question about hiding information or not providing information, quite the contrary. We have provided unprecedented access," he said.

The deadline for the commission to release its final report is in July. That means it will come in the heat of the presidential campaign, and about the same time as the Democratic Party's national convention.

[TaxRelief]

A better version than Reuters?

Condi is perturbed, apparently.

[Cicero]

Mad as hell and not taking it any more would be more accurate. Getting stabbed in the back by a clintonoid slime that you tried to be nice to instead of firing is pretty annoying.

"Hit a raw nerve," indeed. "Finally broke their determination to be polite to scum" would be more like it.

[Atchafalaya]

Pissed is more like it.

[AFreeBird]

Public, private, oath or no oath; Give em Hell Condi!

[JOE6PAK]

[Registered]

Dick Clarke should be the poster child for why Bush should kick out every one of Clinton's people. I don't care how much he could assist the new administration, he and other Clinton holdovers, should have gotten THE BOOT, and those that remain should GET THE BOOT, AND GET IT NOW.

[TaxRelief]

I don't care how much he could assist the new administration, he and other Clinton holdovers, should have gotten THE BOOT,

Another failed appeasement move.

[TaxRelief]

I think Condi just needs a little self-confidence boost, and she would be able to do this thing in Public.

[nutmeg]

I don't care how much he could assist the new administration, he and other Clinton holdovers, should have gotten THE BOOT, and those that remain should GET THE BOOT, AND GET IT NOW.

I totally agree! Anyone in the Bush administration listening...?

[nutmeg]

ping!

Please FReepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent ‘miscellaneous’ ping list.

[lavrenti]

Indeed, the Administration needs to begin hitting back the old-fashioned way. A couple of "come to Jesus" meetings with media executives explaining the importance of FCC licensing, regulatory changes on a myriad of issues of concern to them, and utilizing those famous words of Paul Begala....

"Executive Order? Stroke of the pen? Cool!"

Make the corporate ownership of major newspaper chains, radio and television networks there will be a dear financial price to pay for the tone of their news divisions reporting.

Censorship? You bet. We do it to them before they do it to us.

[brydic1]

It is unbelievable how the republicans mangage to get rolled at every level. The Commission is composed of 5 member appointed by democrats and 5 appointed by republicans. Several of the democrats are hard line democrats, i.e Ben Viniste, Gorelick and Roemer and even to some extent Kerrey. The republicans do not have even one hard line republican. Thompson was a RINO governor of Illinois. Lehman is a huge supporter of McCain. Gorton was always a left wing RINO Senator from Washington. Keane was a RINO governor of New Jersey. Fielding was a Bush-Cheney campaign worker but seems to take little part in the questioning. What is even more telling is the Staff. The Exec Dir., Zelikow was a Harvard Prof and has served with the State Dept. Not sure under which administration but it makes little difference because all State Dept personnel are somewhat to the left of Karl Marx. The Asst Exec Dir., Kojm was a Democrat House of Rep Staff Director and the remaining Staff member, Marcus, Gen Counsel for the Committee, was a White House Counsel for Clinton. Republicans are just totally pathetic.

[Registered]

It is definitely uncomfortable isn't it?

[Embedded Freeper]

I concur.
brydic1 re post No. 12. Grrrrrrr. How sad

[Registered]

There are plenty of good, qualified Republicans looking for positions in the government. They should shovel these Clinton-ites out the door and put some new blood in their places.

[brydic1]

When I was just a kid in high school, rep activist even then, I was asked to make a speech at our County Lincoln Day Dinner. This took place in 1954 and the subject of my speech was the "Overly Left Leftovers" in the Eisenhower Administration. Things really have not changed.

[Registered]

Please post that speech, just change some names. Please.

[brydic1]

LOL, I would but:
Fifty years is a long time to keep a copy of a speech. While Ike did not actually replace many of Truman's appointees when he did it was almost worse. His Chief of Staff, Sherman Adams of NH must have been a close relative of present day Justice Souter. Souter's views are pretty well identical to those of Adams. And who can forget the appointment of Earl Warren. A catastrophe for anyone who believes that laws should be made by the legislative branch and believes that the Constitution could only be amended by the procedure outlined in the Constitution rather than by court edict.

[Registered]

Do it from memory then! Please! Some things are timeless!