Will Condi Rice perjure herself to protect the Bush Administration?

[worldgonekrazy]

Poll question: Will Condi Rice perjure herself to protect the Bush Administration?

I am interested in seeing what expectations DUers have of Condi Rice's upcoming testimony in front of the 9/11 Commission, which will be under oath.

Clearly the commission has been chomping at the bit to question Rice, and now that they have got what they want it seems unlikely (though not impossible) that they will just back off and lob her softball questions.

So what will Rice do when confronted with certain questions, like ones pertaining to her statement that the Bush Administration had no idea terrorists would try to use planes as missiles?

[worldgonekrazy]

1. As a follow up question: where do you expect her testimony to lead?

It seems to me this could be the floodgate that will lead to many more revelations.

Even if she perjures herself to save the Bush Administration, the Commission can probably prove perjury and thus the ball keeps rolling.

Am I being too optimistic here?

[Blasphemer]

12. I agree with you...

The WH wants Condi, *, and Cheney to be the end of the questions, but they CLAIM that Condi will directly refute things that Clarke has said. With 2 different acounts, we need to see some documentation about what really went on. This will bring more calls for the declassification of ALL documents. Those e-mails aren't going to make them look good. Unless, they have forged everything, I don't see any good coming of this, whether she lies or not.

[RT Atlanta]

2. Thoughts

I can't quite envision the scenario, but some how, some way, I suspect Condi will be thrown some softballs and be permitted, without thorough questionning, to seemingly "rebut" many of the contentions raised by Clarke last week.

[worldgonekrazy]

6. What about Ben Veniste, Gorlicke, and Roemer?

These are the three Democratic commission members who seem eager to get at some version of the truth. Will they just stand by while the commission lets her slide?

[DarkPhenyx]

3. She dosen't have a choice.

It isn't just Bush she would be protecting. Her own ass is on the line here. Enlightened self interest is a powerful motivator.

[ChompySnack]

4. Purjury and a "presidential" pardon

Like a hand in a glove

[worldgonekrazy]

7. But if she commits perjury, can't the commission prove it?

They already have some testimony from her in February they might be able to use against her, plus the mountain of evidence they have surely collected by now. Couldn't they use this to prove perjury? Or could the Republican members of the commission effectively block such a maneuver?

[livetohike]

5. She worships the ground Bush

walks on, therefore, I believe she would perjure herself to protect him.

[hippiegranny]

8. she will perjure herself

to tell the truth only would prove that she has been lying all along. what they do with her lies is the real question. will she get a pass? or will she be sacrificed?

[worldgonekrazy]

13. Yes, I suppose that is the real question

I can see this as the Bush Administration's attempt to throw out a sacrificial lamb, but even if that is their attention I just don't believe it will stop there. This thing is snowballing out of control quickly and they know it (hence offering up Condi after vehemently refusing for so long).

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

9. A combo of 2 & 3

She will perjure herself but the commission will throw her softballs (repugs) that is.

[Selwynn]

10. The Comission will let her off the hook.

[rucky]

11. She won't answer the tough questions..... "national security" blah blah

[worldgonekrazy]

14. I consider this to be the commission letting her off the hook

Because if they except that line, that is basically what they will be doing.

[kskiska]

15. You betcha she will

Bush* "loyalty" in action.

[oasis]

16. "I misspoke several times about 'traditional hijackings'". That will not

go over too well.

[kurtyboy]

17. I have wondered why she wouldn't testify in the first place.

I think the whole "executive priviledge" defense was just a convenient rationalization to cover the real reasons.

I think (speculate) that Rice may have told the White House that under no circumstances would she perjure herself. The only solution for the WH then was to refuse to allow sworn testimony (why didn't she swear-in for her private testimony earlier?).

Now that the stakes are so much higher, the WH has agreed to allow the testimony--but their agreement has a poison pill. The stipulation that no other official can be called before the commission is unacceptable for any truth-seeking body. DOn't expect to see Condi raising her right hand any time soon.