Skip to comments.
Clinton, Gore Not Slated to Give 9/11 Testimony Under Oath
Newsmax ^
| 3-29-04
| Carl Limbacher
Posted on 03/29/2004 6:07:59 AM PST by truthandlife
Ex-President Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore have not agreed to give sworn testimony to the Sept. 11th Commission - or even to answer questions in public - about their role in events leading up to America's worst disaster - making them the only non-office-holders granted that privilege by the Commission.
President Bush and Vice President Cheney are also slated for private, non-sworn interviews with the 9/11 Commission, but sitting presidents and vice presidents typically do not testify under oath in non-criminal investigations.
It's not clear why the 9/11 Commission has insisted that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice break with precedent for someone in her position and give sworn public testimony, while no such precedent protects former office-holders like Clinton and Gore.
Earlier this month, initial reports indicated that Clinton and Gore would testify publicly without time constraint, but their aides quickly made it clear that the two top Clinton adminsitration officials expected to treated no differently from the sitting president and vice president.
One topic 9/11 probers would likely want to cover with Clinton and Gore are reports that they turned down an offer from Sudan to have Osama bin Laden arrested and brought to the U.S. in 1996, even though by that time bin Laden had already been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: 911; 911commission; algore; clinton; gore; lies; notunderoath; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 next last
To: Mo1
Cause they are on a witch hunt against Condi .. That's whyExactly...they are trying to destroy Condi's credibility in the public eye now, they are afraid she is going to run for President in 2008 against Hitlery.
To: MrB
Oath only means something to someone that values their character and their word. In other words, no use putting them under oath, they'd just lie anyway. Exactly
42
posted on
03/29/2004 7:38:45 AM PST
by
TC Rider
(The United States Constitution © 1791. All Rights Reserved.)
To: truthandlife
So, what's your point. We all know they're going to lie anyway.
43
posted on
03/29/2004 7:51:24 AM PST
by
AMNZ
To: mewzilla
Miniter's book should be REQUIRED reading for every pundit, flak and shill that opens his pie hole about Clarke's "impeccable" credentials.
44
posted on
03/29/2004 8:07:01 AM PST
by
Choose Ye This Day
("We are delighted that Pecker will be leading the way.")
To: MrB
Just spit coffee on the keyboard. These two under OATH???
LOL Just means their lies would only have to be a little more clever amd bubba will have to work on his lip biting. The media will take care of the rest.
To: Bahbah
Bingo. I think that's pretty clear. From what I understand, the White House and Condi have been pretty accessible and cooperative in executive session, so the only "advantage" to public testimony is the aforementioned "grandstanding".
46
posted on
03/29/2004 9:34:32 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: BigSkyFreeper
Is there any way to write or email the Commission? It's obviously a political entity; they should be willing to take the heat from the public.
47
posted on
03/29/2004 9:35:46 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: mewzilla
Why has John Lewis Gaddis appeared on "Today," "60 Minutes," "GMA," "Hardball," et al, unlike Clarke? (Don't bother answering; I already know why.)
48
posted on
03/29/2004 9:37:42 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: My2Cents
Have you read his book, though? Read his book.
49
posted on
03/29/2004 9:41:34 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: freeperfromnj
Last night Drudge said Woodward has a book coming out in two weeks that is supposed to be more explosive than Clark's.Woodward...Oh, you mean the guy who lied about "Deep Throat"?
50
posted on
03/29/2004 9:42:04 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: daybreakcoming
Maybe that is why they are coming after Condi so hard.....they know the President will not let her testify in public....so the dims can use this as a excuse for the impeachedone/algore not to testify....makes you go ummmm
Also, on being sworn/not sworn in when they give their testimony......heard Lehman on the Today show this morning say that it doesn't matter......it is illegal to lie to their commission.....whether they are sworn in or not. He told LIARMatt that it didn't matter if Condi was sworn in or not......it is illegal either way. I wondered at the time if he was sending a message to Clarke about his private testimony.
51
posted on
03/29/2004 9:45:01 AM PST
by
bornintexas
(..Release your military records, John F'n Kerry!)
To: My2Cents
He's the one. It seems like all the rats were holding off putting their books out until the time period between the 9/11 hearings and the election. The fact that we have a commission that cites lies from newly released books is an outrage.
To: freeperfromnj
I guess this is their strategy to get around Campaign Finance Reform -- publish a critical book, make the rounds of the major news magazine shows, and then getting your day before a commission tops it all off.
53
posted on
03/29/2004 9:50:07 AM PST
by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: bornintexas
The Republicans should practice something the LEFTISTS have down to a fine science.
GET CONDI to scream from the rooftops that she is being PERSECUTED because she is BLACK and a WOMEN...that everyone else "excused" are WHITE MEN!
54
posted on
03/29/2004 10:06:53 AM PST
by
antivenom
("Never argue with an idiot, he'll bring you down to his level - then beat you with experience.")
To: plain talk
This is a circus and shouldn't be treated as such by the Bush administration. Say what??
To: My2Cents
56
posted on
03/29/2004 10:18:00 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke)
To: freeperfromnj
drag it out until CBS can run another 60 minutes hit piece hawking Woodward's book.Woodward will be interviewed on 60 Minutes. His book is also being published by the same publishing house of Paul O'Neil and Richard Clarke's book. Yep, you guessed it, Simon & Shuster. The same publishing house owned by Viacom, which owns SeeBS.
57
posted on
03/29/2004 10:22:01 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke)
To: Mo1
Methinks "someone" is waiting for Bob Woodward's book to come out for Round #2 of the smear campaign or until an "event" occurs. What was the next step in that blasted Democrat memo anyway?
This commission is a joke. Could've guessed it would turn into an anti-Bush fest.
To: antivenom
You could go one step further with that. The Liberals are going after Condi because she may become a VP nominee in the not-so-distant future, the Democrats will lose that election, and they know it.
59
posted on
03/29/2004 10:46:16 AM PST
by
BigSkyFreeper
(Liberalism is Communism one drink at a time. - P.J. O'Rourke)
To: Mo1
Cause they are on a witch hunt against Condi .. That's why<'RAT MODE>Let us burn her!</'RAT MODE>
60
posted on
03/29/2004 11:01:23 AM PST
by
Stultis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson