Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Josh Marshall explains why Condi won’t testify

with 3 comments

Very clear explanation:

Written by LeisureGuy

30 April 2007 at 10:34 am

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Yeah, I know. Saw this. What Marshall doesn’t confront is the knowledge that the Brits never backed down from their intelligence. The Italian forgeries are rather old news, and weren’t part of MI-6’s assessment.

    Bush’s statement was about what British intelligence knew, and Rice is not afraid to confront that. What you, JM, and Waxman don’t realize is that Condi understands that Waxman actually has a really weak hand with which to play this game.

    If you were afraid of Henry Waxman with subpoena power, you wouldn’t be baiting him and treating him like a used car dealer, would you? But that’s exactly what she’s been doing. When you understand that, you’ll understand exactly why Josh Marshall has it exactly wrong. Rice wants to testify; in fact, she’s already split the committee along partisan lines and shaped the battlefield to her advantage.

    Rice will testify. It is in her interest to testify, but only after a protracted period in which Waxman gets more threatening and we are guaranteed a media circus. This will guarantee Ollie North style hearings, which is exactly what she, and Karl Rove, want.

    This is the only explanation I can find for her uncooperative conduct with Waxman’s committee. You must understand that Rice believes, as most Republicans do, that Waxman is not interested in the Truth, Waxman is interested in a Political Trial.

    The WH believes that this affair can be turned to their advantage, the benefits to Republicans would be astounding. She is several steps ahead of Waxman on this, that’s what nobody understands. The impression can be cemented in the minds of the American people of an out of control Democratic Congress that does nothing but persecute that nice looking black lady on the TV.

    Waxman has walked into a trap, one I have seen coming for weeks.


    30 April 2007 at 3:29 pm

  2. Well, we’ll soon know and watch it play out. Should be interesting however it goes—unless she does the Alberto Gonzales thing and develops acute early-onset Alzheimer’s.


    30 April 2007 at 3:43 pm

  3. BTW, I sent your comment to Josh Marshall. He replied:

    I don’t know who the author is. But they don’t know the subject well. As I’ve explained in previous reporting, the British judgment did rely on the forgeries though they later tried to deny that this was the case. A careful reading of the two British reports on the matter show clearly that this is the case.


    30 April 2007 at 4:57 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.