Clinton, Gore Not Slated to Give 9/11 Testimony Under Oath

Newsmax ^ | 3-29-04 | Carl Limbacher

[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.

[oceanview]

Woodward was given unprecedented access to the white house after 9/11, and has already written a good book based on those observations. I don't think he will be able to generate a "hit book" on Bush, essentially refuting his first book.

[oceanview]

just anothe rexample on how totally worthless Tom Kean, and seemingly most of the other republican appointees to this committe are. what is wrong with the members on our side, have they all been blackmailed by the Dems?

[freeperfromnj]

I don't think he will be able to generate a "hit book" on Bush, essentially refuting his first book.

Hope you're right. On his radio show last night, Drudge indicated that it would be more explosive than Clark's book and portray Bush in a negative way.

[oceanview]

Well, who knows. He would have to essentially refute much of his first book. Not that his first book was a glowing tribute to Bush, but it appeared to be straightforward and factual. Here is a snippet of a review:

"Woodward's analysis of President Bush's leadership style is especially fascinating. A self-described "gut player" who relies heavily on instinct, Bush comes across as a man of action continually pressing his cabinet for concrete results. The revelation that the president developed and publicly stated the so-called Bush Doctrine--the policy that the U.S. would not only go after terrorists everywhere but also those governments or groups which harbor them--without first consulting Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of State Colin Powell, or Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is particularly telling. Other principals are examined with equal scrutiny. Though National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice emerges as soft-spoken and even tentative during group meetings, it becomes clear that Bush is dependent on her for candid advice as well as for conveying his thoughts to his cabinet. The relationship between Powell and Rumsfeld (and to a lesser degree Powell and Cheney) is often strained, exposing their differences regarding how to deal with Iraq and whether coalition building or unilateralism is most appropriate. Woodward also describes how CIA director George Tenet prepared a paramilitary team to infiltrate Afghanistan to set the groundwork for invasion, and how this ushered in a new era of cooperation between the defense department and the CIA. A worthwhile and often enlightening read, this is a revealing and informative first draft of the Bush legacy."

[daybreakcoming]

And which publisher has got Bubba's book coming out later this year?

[plain talk]

This is a circus and shouldn't be treated as such by the Bush administration.
Say what??

Oops. I meant ".. and SHOULD be treated as such ..."

[BigSkyFreeper]

Simon und Shuster.

[theDentist]

An oath never stopped Clinton from lying before...

[Irish Eyes]

Oops. I meant ".. and SHOULD be treated as such ..."

Thanks for the clarification I was a little worried about you. ....LOL

[aikido7]

Just because Nixon's advisors Erlichman and Haldeman testified in public does not mean that Bush's advisors have to.

This has nothing to do with credibilty or dissembling. To maintain focus and power during all the liberal attacks, Bush has to be less than candid. Plus, when we are at war, selective parsing and ommitting certain facts are expected.

Bush may be under the gun but he is doing the best he can with the information and beliefs he has.

[MortMan]

Um - No. That would be X42, Komrade Klinton. :-)

[Grassontop]

My wife and I think that Richard Clark is jealous and a racist to Condi Rice! He is mad because he didn't get the position of Homeland Security and therefore we also think that the Clintons are behind all this 911 hearing! Then, maybe we might be wrong! Who really knows what the "ell" going on other than that the demon rats are trying very hard to get flip flopper in the white house. God have mercy on our United States if he does!

[Two Thirds Vote Aye]

Why would this even enter the equation? It would be as stupid as asking Saddam if he knew where the weapons of mass destruction were and, telling him ahead of time that if he answerd "No", he will be released. How do you think he would answer? In like fashion, how do you think the raping, perjuring pervert would answer?

[Carolinamom]

Clinton, Gore Not Slated to Give 9/11 Testimony Under Oath

[I'm ALL Right!]

ED BRADLEY...HAVE YOU SCHEDULED A DISRESPECTFUL INTERVIEW FOR BILL AND AL???

[Brimack34]

Every channel Rice should testify. O'really-Chrissy and Cnn.
Nothing on the two bozo's. Does O' do any work I can understand the rest but Bill come on.

[ladyinred]

It would do no good to put either one of those jokesters under oath! They don't respect things like truth telling. The President better be aware that the rats are already leaking what Condi said behind closed doors before he goes there. You cannot trust the rats.

[Just Lori]

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.


Yeah rite, like being under oath means anything to slick Willie. Get me an aspirin!

[Cheetah1]

ALl of this makes me SICK

I have been watching in as I have been on my travels...at the airports.

Everytime I see Clarke I start to jeer...and chant liar liar...or how goes the book sales.

IT IS DISGUSTING.

And the dems were upset over that Bush ad????

GIVE ME A BREAK

I wish people would wake up...I am afraid though that there are a lot of stupid people out there and they will believe just about anything.

Sick...Sick...Sick...Sick

God help us if Kerry wins as President...and that is no joke!

[AnimalLover]

BUMP