NIGHTLINE: Called to Testify

[Sticky]

TONIGHT'S FOCUS: After about a week of resisting, the White House announced today that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice will testify before the commission investigating the attacks on 9-11 under oath, and in public. Why the change?

This has been one of those stories that makes all of us who work in Washington question ourselves. Is this just the clichéd "inside the Beltway" story that the rest of the country just doesn't care about? That happens all the time, and from inside the Beltway, it's hard to remember sometimes that what is big news here is not necessarily news in the rest of the country. But our sense is that the controversy over the testimony by Richard Clarke, and the subsequent attacks on him, is news. There is one corner near our office that has a whole herd of newspaper boxes, the local papers of course, but also papers from Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, and even the Los Angeles Times. The other day I walked by and the headline on every one of them was about this story. Big headlines.

Now for the last week or so, the White House and its allies have been attacking Richard Clarke. And there is something of a pattern there. A fairly sizeable number of insiders, for lack of a better term, members of the administration, or of the military, or people who have worked closely with the administration, have come forward to make a very similar charge. They have said that the Bush administration was predisposed towards the invasion of Iraq, and that preoccupation distracted attention from the war on terrorism. Nightline has covered the debate of the use and shaping of intelligence on Iraq many times. And in almost every case, the response has been the same: critics of the White House have been attacked. Correspondent John Donvan will look at this pattern, and also the events of the day. And today's main event is the decision by the White House to allow Ms. Rice to testify under oath and in public. Up to now, the administration's position has been that such testimony would go against practice and set a dangerous precedent, possibly weakening the separation of powers between the various branches of government. Today the White House said she could testify, but as a condition, the 9-11 Commission has to say, in writing, that this sets no precedent. Whether such an assurance would actually carry any weight in a future debate is an open question. The White House has also said that the President and the Vice-President will appear before the commission, but not under oath, and in private.

So what to make of all this? The fact that all this is happening in an election year is obviously shaping just about everything that happens. Ted will anchor tonight, and we're still working out who his guests will be. We have called the White House three times today, asking if they will put someone forward to appear on the show. They have declined. But I hope that all of you will join us.

[sadiesworld]

1. kick

I really need to hope that these issues will be addressed fairly sometime, somewhere.

[nickinSTL]

2. ABC

Wow, one of the national news outlets is actually thinking about following some of this stuff? Great!

Not getting my hopes up too much, though.

[Cocoa]

3. too bad it's Ted

Nightline has marginal worth when Chris Bury is anchoring. With Ted it's almost worthless.