[GeoPie]

She better not testify in public. That would drive me postal....All it would be is the DEm's grandstanding and putting her down; she'd have to stit there and smile. Total joke. If she was a dem and the Rep's treated her this way it would be non stop front page news about the racist repub's.

[Eva]

I agree, no public testimony for administration officials. Let Mansoor Ijaz do it for them.

[Coeur de Lion]

Give me a break! She absolutely should testify before the commitee. One, there's nothing lost if she does. And secondly, that would prevent the media and the dems from using her lack of open testimony as proof that there must be some substance in Clarke's lies!

[McGavin999]

She should tell the people that she will gladly testify in public, under oath, as soon as the congress gives up congressional immunity. As soon as they do, in writing, she will testify.

[plain talk]

All it would be is the DEm's grandstanding and putting her down; she'd have to sit there and smile.

While I agree that she shouldn't testify publicly and the dems would grandstand, she certainly would not have to sit there and take it. In fact, she could gain a lot of mileage out of throwing it back at the dems and telling them to STFU. I'd love to see it. Still, I see no point in participating in Ben-Veniste's charade. Plus she has already testified privately. That's more than they deserve.

[oceanview]

she could play the race car, its fine with me. she could say its another "high tech lynching". go for it, take the gloves off.

who is interviewing her? is it Ed Bradley?