Carla
March 28th, 2004, 8:12pm
I would think that if there was anything in his testimony that could be held against him, he wouldn't be pushing for this. I also like his position that if they want to declassify his testimony, they need to declassify everything.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4619346/
tncorgi
March 28th, 2004, 9:33pm
yikes...secret emails. Mr Clarke's bravura presentation is willing to release his information but the white house....you probably know the rest...
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington and Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Monday March 29, 2004
The Guardian
Richard Clarke, the former terrorism adviser whose revelations threaten to torpedo George Bush's re-election strategy, launched a counterattack yesterday at a White House that he said was determined to destroy him.
In a riveting television performance, Mr Clarke called on his principal critic and former employer, the national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to release the entire record of their emails in the months up to the September 11 terror attacks to prove his contention that the White House did not then take the threat of al-Qaida seriously.
He also agreed to Republican demands to declassify testimony he gave to the Senate two years ago - to "prove" there were no inconsistencies. "Let's take all of my emails and all the memos I sent to the national security adviser and her deputy from January 20 to September 11 and let's declassify all of them," Mr Clarke told NBC television.
Mr Clarke's bravura presentation surprised the Bush administration. The decision to stand his ground could also be destructive to Ms Rice. She has been under intense scrutiny for a week - largely for being the focus of Mr Clarke's charges that the Bush government did not see al-Qaida as a priority before September 11, but also because she refused to testify before the commission.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections2004/story/0,13918,1180088,00.html