no rice under oath?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by DKSuddeth, Mar 26, 2004.

  1. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...=/ap/20040327/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/rice_hot_seat


    Rice Discusses Terror, but Not Under Oath


    By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent

    WASHINGTON - Condoleezza Rice says the Bush administration has a good story to tell about fighting terrorism and she's pouring it out in television appearances, interviews and newspaper articles. The one place she won't talk is in public, under oath, before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

    That is blossoming into a public relations nightmare.

    The White House finds itself in the awkward position of trying to explain why Rice, the national security adviser to President Bush (news - web sites), can talk at length to reporters but not at the commission's televised hearings because of the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

    "This is mostly about politics, not about the legalities," said Michael Gerhardt, a constitutional law professor at the College of William and Mary who specializes in separation of powers. "There's not much they can point to as settled law to prevent this. This is a matter of political judgment, not legal judgment. ... It hasn't kept her from talking to the press."


    Instead of testifying publicly, Rice is requesting a private meeting with the commission — her second such session — to discuss what the White House says are mischaracterizations of her statements.


    doesn't bode well for a credibility stopper
     

Share This Page