
In case you're not keeping tabs
on the 9/11 investigation, there was an
interesting development in the proceedings last
week. After negotiating with the 9/11 commission
(like a criminal would negotiate a plea bargain,
not like a president who was in charge of the
nation when the biggest terrorist attack in
American history took place), it looks like Bush's
people have figured out a way to let national
security advisor, Condeleezza Rice, testify
before the commission. And it looks like the
commission, the truth, and the nation all got
screwed in the process.
Here's a quick recap of the
political landscape surrounding this development:
Two weeks ago, Richard Clarke, former White House
counterterrorism expert under Reagan, Bush I,
Clinton, and Dubya, pulled back the curtain
enshrouding the incompetent morons who work the
Great and Powerful Wizard of Shock and Awez.
Clarke charged that Bush and Company were too
distracted with planning an attack on Iraq to
heed the warnings from him and others to that al
Qaeda posed an imminent threat to America. He
charged that Bush's plan to fight terrorism was
too little, too late. And he charged that Bush's
war in Iraq was not only unrelated to the war on
terror, but actually undermined our ability to
prosecute the war on terror. In other words, he
told the truth. And if the Bush administration is
to remain in power, it can't afford to let the
truth go unanswered.
The problem with disputing
Clarke's charges is that doing so under oath
could involve jail time. The 9/11 commission is
not a campaign ad. There will be no adoring crowd
of hand-picked party hacks cheering the
administration's answers. There will be no banner
behind them proclaiming, "Kicking Ass on
Terrorism." When you open your mouth in
front of the 9/11 commission, you usually have to
tell at least some form of the truth or face
serious consequences. Hence, the necessity for
negotiations before the White House agreed to
testify.
So here's the plan. George,
Dick, and Condi (or in this case, "Con"
will do) agree to testify, provided the following:
1. The commission provides
written assurance that having Rice testify doesn't
set any sort of precedent that might allow actual
oversight over the executive branch. This is, of
course, a red herring. Asking somebody to testify
before an independent commission that Bush helped
create is much different than compelling somebody
to testify before a congressional committee.
2. Bush and Cheney will not
testify under oath or in public. This is the
single dumbest thing to come out of this
agreement. What possible reason could these two
have for inserting this demand into the
negotiation? Why would the commission want to
hear from them at all if they weren't prepared to
tell the truth? Given Bush's and Cheney's long
and well-documented record of lying their asses
off about war in Iraq and the war on terror,
wouldn't somebody on the commission be a little
concerned that the duo's testimony might be
somewhat less than truthful? I mean, I realize
that these two guys regard taking an oath the
same way vampires regard a crucifix, but come on.
Anybody on the commission who is only interested
in getting the truth from Bush and Cheney may as
well bring along their Gameboys to this hearing.
3. Bush and Cheney will testify
simultaneously. That means that each can hear the
other's answers, allowing father and son to get
their stories straight on the fly. Cheney can lie
with the best of them, and hearing Cheney's
answers means Bush won't have to remember all of
those complicated fabrications. This will
invariably lead to Bush's single most popular
answer throughout the hearing: "I agree with
whatever the vice-president just said."
Cheney's recurring phrase will be, "What the
president meant to say was . . ." On the
other hand, the entertainment value could still
be pretty high. I hear Cheney has been practicing,
and that Bush may actually answer a couple of
questions while Dick drinks a glass of water. Now,
that's talent.
4. Rice will testify under oath
and in public, but,
5. Once the trio is finished
testifying, the panel will not be allowed to call
any more witnesses from the Bush administration.
This will allow Rice to adopt a strategy of
simply denying that she and Richard Clarke had
much contact prior to 9/11. Since the Bush
administration demoted Clarke's position from
cabinet-level to staff-level, a sure sign that
Bush took terrorism seriously, Clarke would have
reported to Rice's subordinates. Therefore, Rice's
pat answer for each of Clarke's charges will be
either, "I never received that information
from my underlings," or, "My underlings
blew it." And, thanks to Bush's deal with
the commission, those underlings can't be called
before the commission to defend themselves.
So, there you have it. The Bush
Administration's 9/11 Commission Testimony
Playbook. Deny when possible, blame others when
necessary, and make sure that those who get
saddled with the blame don't have to respond.
Risky, to be sure, but when a majority of
Americans believes that Bush is hiding something
related to 9/11, there's not much choice.
Relax, George. You can always
bury the whole nasty episode in $180 million
worth of campaign advertising. And nobody ever
goes to jail for lying in a campaign ad.
4/04/04
Unless
otherwise noted, all original content and
headlines are © The Angry Liberal . Contact The
Angry Liberal for
reprint rights.
|