In a letter to the 9/11 commission, White House counsel Alberto Gonzales said the panel must agree in writing that Rice's appearance would not set a precedent for testimony by White House staff and that no additional public testimony will be requested from any White House official, including Rice. --CNN.
So, what does that even mean, exactly? That this does not weaken the (slightly silly) line they had drawn in the sand, and that this won't make it easier to pressure White House advisers into sworn testification?
But isn't it obvious what it really means? That it won't set a precedent except for the next case where everybody agrees they are not setting a precedent?
So that grave issue of constitutional separation of powers can apparently be resolved with something like,
'Today is opposite day. But we won't have any more of these!'
Ouch, my head.
Posted by: The Bellman on Mar 30, 04 | 5:21 pm
---------------------
COMMENTS
---------------------
I wasn't exactly aware what the 9/11 commission did all day (and thanks to the internet that problem has been solved). Wait. No. I'm still a little confused. Why is the "The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" truncated to "The 9-11 Commission"? Style?
Although I can see how tNCoTAUtUS is missing the sizzle of such number combos as Front242 or ZeroBoy, I have to say... I thought it was going to just be a group of folks investigating the terrorist attacks on/in/around Sept. 11. Not so. It's that AND a whole lot more! There is a terror-polloza list of road gigs and on May 18 and 19th "The 9-11 Plot" will be playin' NYC!
Actually, I'd never given this site a once over... and I'm glad I did. I'd suggest hitting the staff statements if you're the type that likes to cut to the juice.
I heard Bush pushing the word "unique" when addressing this unprecedentification. He said the administration agreed to this "unique" request because of the "unique" aspects of the 911 attacks. Wow, that's real nice... how about you, the President of the United States of America, try something a little "unique" and have a dialogue with the people you represent instead of cutting off your tail and running away?
I find the whole game very cowardly.
You hear that Bush and Cheney will *NOT* be under oath?
Unbelievable.
Posted by: monkey on Mar 31, 04 | 3:25 am
---------------------
Bush and Cheney are also going to do a joint appearance instead of chatting individually.
Posted by: The Bellman on Mar 31, 04 | 8:21 am
