Tuesday, March 30, 2004 :::
I don't understand, really, either side of the Rice testimony flap, so I'll lay out what I understand and hope someone can correct me. As I understand it, she's agreed to testify to the commission in private, and she appeared on 60 minutes, but she won't testify to the committee in public, on the grounds that separation of powers requires that discussions between the president and his advisors be privileged.If that inhibits public testimony, why doesn't it inhibit private testimony? On the other hand, if she's already testified in front of CBS, nobody could really expect that "public" testimony in front of a CSPAN audience would really be more public, can they? Is the expectation that the committee would ask her different questions? Is the administration's concern that it would be harder for her to decline individual questions than in either other forum? Someone help me out here.
::: posted by dWj at 8:06 AM
|