I believe Richard Clarke is telling the truth

[Postman]

Clarke has exposed these liars for what they are.

Bush is hiding behind Rice's skirt in conjuring up this "seperation of powers" BS.

Testify in public and under oath, you lying bastards.

Release ALL of the testimony of Richard Clarke as he said, not just bits and pieces.

This is the most corrupt administration in the history of the country.

[Skip Intro]

1. Under oath only means SWEARING TO TELL THE DAMNED TRUTH!

In this corner, a man who has sworn, under penalty of perjury, to tell the truth.

And in this corner, a group of people who refuse to swear to tell the truth.

Tell me again, who has the credibility problem?

[eaprez]

2. Me too...

...unfortunately it hasn't had much impact on Bush's popularity. In fact a poll released today show most hold Clinton accountable for 911. I can't comprehend what one has to tell themself in order to remain loyal to this man. For the life of me, I can't grasp it.

[Malva Zebrina]

4. would be great if Clinton broke tradition, came out and defended himself

against these liars. It is the commission and the media that is playing up the meme that 9-11 could not have been prevented and that Clinton did not do as much as he could either.

[Wapsie B]

6. People who still believe

in chimpy's leadership ability after all this need to stay in their comfort zones. To believe that he could be complicit somehow in 9/11 is beyond their scope of comprehension. Just as much as these people thought the world was going to end when Bill had his bj, they just cannot question chimpy. This core voter wouldn't be able to handle the thought that all they know is a lie. Some of them could snap big time.

[eleny]

3. Condi put him in charge on 9/11

I'd say that they trusted him, too. So I'm with you. He's on the up n' up!

[salinen]

5. Those stupid bitches

are making Condi out to be someone who will only lie to the people, but not to God.

[Broward]

7. I agree

Any other motivation just doesn't make sense. The White House probably documents almost everything. Richard Clarke knows this. So, you're telling me that RC would jeopardize everything to sell a few books. How could he get away with lying when the WH would have the evidence to contradict him? The answer is that he's telling the truth and the WH can't contradict him. It's very telling that the WH has offered practically nothing (save a Condi Rice e-mail and some background briefing) to refute his testimony. Furthermore, they had his book for 3 mos and this is all they got.