Another Bush Flip-Flop

from the Stonewaller-in-Chief:

• Bush refuses to declassify thousands of Clinton-era documents for 9/11 commission
• Bush agrees to allow 9/11 commission to review Clinton documents

link

   

WASHINGTON -- In its second high-profile turnabout of the week, the Bush administration agreed yesterday to give the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks full access to the papers of former President Clinton.

    The decision came after commission officials pressed the White House to turn over thousands of pages of documents that had been shipped from the former president's archives for review by the commission.

    The White House received 11,000 pages of Clinton documents, but turned over less than 25 percent of them to the commission despite repeated requests for all of them, according to commission officials and a top aide to the former president.

    The decision to release all the Clinton papers came two days after President Bush announced that White House national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice would testify publicly before the commission.

High profile turnarounds only emphasize that public pressure still matters, and that this 9/11 Commission story isn't nearly over.

Josh Marshall (as usual) has more:

The article says some commission members are now raising the possibility that the White House is withholding other documents as well.

And, finally, here is what has to be the quote of the day, from Commissioner Jamie Gorelick:"We can't afford to have documents that are relevant to our inquiry being withheld on a technicality. This is not litigation. This is finding facts to help the nation, and we should not treat this as if we're adversarial parties here."

Too bad some White Houses don't seem to see it that way.

And too bad for wall-to-wall TV. CNN/USA Today/Gallup says:

  "Do you think the Bush Administration is or is not covering up something about its handling of intelligence information concerning possible terrorist attacks before September 11, 2001?"
                       Is   Is Not   No Opinion        

   3/26-28/04     53     41     6    

I wonder why they think that?

Update [2004-4-3 14:12:24 by DemFromCT]: from AP:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The federal panel reviewing the Sept. 11 attacks will determine early next week whether thousands of classified counterterrorism documents from the Clinton administration were unduly held back by aides to President Bush. The Bush administration granted the Sept. 11 commission access to the documents Friday after Bruce Lindsey, who was legal adviser to former President Clinton, said officials didn't turn over all of Clinton's records to the panel. The commission's lawyers will begin reviewing the material Monday and should know by Tuesday if additional documents should be released, panel commission spokesman Al Felzenberg said Friday. "Mr. Lindsey voiced a concern. We shared the concern. So they have come up with a way of assuring us that we have access to the materials we need,'' Felzenberg said. ``We'll know quickly if there are materials we should have or if they are duplicates.'' Until then, Felzenberg said, the commission is withholding judgment as to why some documents weren't released. ``There's a lot of paper flying around. Let's see if there's more to the charge than we know,'' he said.

•  best line from McClellan

  you (and Josh) left out what I thought was the most entertaining graph in the article.

  To Gorelick's assertion that the White House might be withholding other documents from other sources, here's Scott McClellan's response:

  "We have been fully responsive to the commission's request, and any allegation to the contrary is simply ridiculous. . . . If the commission now wants to go back and verify that some documents are duplicative or nonresponsive to their request, then we are more than happy to work with the commission so that they can do so."

  snarky AND lying, all in a single statement.

  by dirtgirl on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 10:33:52 AM PDT

  •  McClellan's Irrelevancy

    ...some documents are duplicative or nonresponsive...

    Question: Did the 9/11 Commission ask for this White House "assistance"?

    by sipples on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 10:39:42 AM PDT

•  Something Ill in the American Body Politic

  What surprises me is that 41 percent in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll believe Bush Administration is not covering anything up.  Are these people demented?  Can we do something for them?

  by patachon on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:00:36 AM PDT

  •  ...or to them?

    by pam on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:19:02 PM PDT

    •  if Bush's base is 38% ( my guess, Gallup says 39)

      then these are great numbers. The religious right doesn't need facts.

      by DemFromCT on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:22:13 PM PDT

  •  and that is why...

    Air America is sooooo important.  People will go there, not because they're responsible Americans but because they want to be entertained and these people on that network are very very funny.

    By the way, since Air America may have some important historical relavence, how come C-SPAN hasn't been simulcasting it?  They've simulcasted Limbaugh, Hannity and many of the right wingers!

    by cpa1 on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 06:18:56 PM PDT

•  Does the White House write the headlines for the

  Seattle Times?  "Release all" documents?  The White House is saying they'll let the Commission "review" the documents -- there will certainly be more resistance once the Commission determines what it thinks is interesting.

  by bdbd on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:04:46 AM PDT

  •  Deadline?

    This is the commission that Hastert tried to refuse the extention of time, right?  What is the new deadline?  My guess is they will just prolong this fight for documents until the deadline and then sayd OOPS, Sorry, no time.

    by GrandmaJ on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:14:33 AM PDT

•  When we say "duplicative"...

  ...we mean that there's lots of references to "al Qaeda" and "Clinton administration plans" and stuff, and we've already heard everything we need to about all that.

  by NTodd on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:31:42 AM PDT

•  Not quite all

  of the Clinton docs are open to review by the commission. According to the WaPo:

  Lindsey said yesterday that, based on final numbers he had received from the archives, the White House turned over 1,966 pages of 10,790 total, or about 18 percent. Another 90 pages of Clinton documents are also in dispute, but officials were unable to provide further details about that batch yesterday.

  So there are still 90 pages the Bushies are withholding. You have to wonder what's in there. Their political defense, which had been 'Better than Clinton' has subtly shifted to 'As good as Clinton'

  In the political short term, it's no wonder they flipped so fast. Withholding over 80% of the Clinton files was a huge embarrassment in the wake of the Condi flip. It remains to be seen if they'll have to adjust their defense again as a result of what's in the documents.

  So, just as they put out one 'what do they have to hide?' fire, another one erupts. But as before, they are still playing games. Who's driving this bus? This is starting to have the feel of a serious unravelling.

  The commission should demand all documents, including the missing 90 pages, be turned over immediately - not just made available for review.

  by JoeWPgh on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 11:46:39 AM PDT

•  How do we stop them...

  from politicizing the 9/11 commission? and withholding documents? and setting bizarre limits on who can be called and when?
  This all seems so wrong.
  Where's the outrage? This is f***ing 9/11 we're talking about!

  A little help please - the Independent has a story about a former FBI translator, who says that Condi knew they were threatening to use airplanes as weapons against skyscrapers - Any guesses as to why no one else besides the Washington Times (!) has a note about it?

  http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=507514

  http://www.washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040402-064359-3845r.htm

  if this is true, it explains why the whitehouse has behaved so guiltily abd savagely - it's the proverbial smoking gun - it means the threat was out there, they were aware, they went on vacation - just like Bush says in the already oft quoted Woodward Book, "...no urgency."
   Negligence is more like it

  by karlpk on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:08:24 PM PDT

  •  I don't have all the answers but see

    this story from yesterday.

    I assume the 9/11 Commission, who she's testified in front of, will be asking Condi on Thursday.

    Also see comments by Kagro X on same topic.

    by DemFromCT on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:17:03 PM PDT

•  Thank you, Bruce Lindsey

  Another Clintonite scores a hit against the thugs...

  by Volvo Liberal on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:13:29 PM PDT

•  Defending Markos

  Defending Markos.

  by Stirling Newberry on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 12:37:18 PM PDT

•  My Blog - NYT history

  All Clarke's points were printed there.

  Also, the flip flop is only pro forma - they won't release the papers - just allow commission members in a roomful of bozes for 1 h - without the right to take notes
  as Josh marshall read in the fine print

  http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_03_28.php#002794

  But then there's this: "But in comments to  reporters in Huntington,
  W.Va., McClellan declined to say whether the White House would agree to
  actually hand over any of the disputed documents at issue, raising the
  possibility of further disputes."

  by robbedvoter on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:10:56 PM PDT

•  Talk about flip-flops

  This is the 5th flip-flop on the 9/11 commission alone:

  1.  Creation of comm.
  2.  One hour time limit for Bush
  3.  Request for extension of time
  4.  Condi's testimony
  5.  Release of Clinton-era documents

  It not just the number of flip-flops, it's the topic: 9/11 and how we can prevent that from happening again.  Why fight that?  How can anyone with a brain vote for Bush?

  by Dr Van Nostrand on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:15:03 PM PDT

•  Letter to the Editor material

  This prompted me to send my very first pro-Bush letter to the editor.  I mean, credit where credit is due:

  To the Editor:

  As much as it pains me I must applaud President Bush's latest flip-flop on the 9-11 Commission. I see he has decided to allow the Commission to review the full documentation from the Clinton Administration, rather than selected bits.

  Coupled with his flip-flop first preventing, and then allowing Condoleeza Rice to testify under oath to the Commission...

  ...his flip-flop about limiting his own testimony before the Commission to a single hour...

  ...his flip-flop about extending the Commission's mandate for an additional two months...

  ...and of course his original flip-flop of  opposing, then supporting the creation of the Commission in the first place, we may finally get an accurate picture of exactly how the federal government failed its citizens on September 11, 2001.

  It takes courage to admit you're wrong, and fortunately George W. Bush has had the opportunity to show such courage again and again and again...

  by Randomfactor on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:40:29 PM PDT

  •  good one

    He's had more opportunities than any one I can think of, with the possible exzception of David Brooks.

    by DemFromCT on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 02:43:00 PM PDT

•  Getting at the root cause of terrorism

  It is time to be able to ask and discuss the question "what motivates al-Qaeda recruits, and what can we do about it?"

  "They hate freedom" is not good enough.

  Consider this, from an April 2002 article by Jonathan Dean:

  "However, cruise missiles and B52's won't stop the process of recruitment of potential martyrs. Economic development, although necessary, is too slow in its effects to stop it. The al Qaeda belief system is in fact an ideology, an amalgam of propositions taken on faith with concrete political goals. This ideology has to be attacked directly and discredited.

  That is the aim of the measures we propose, which have also been adopted by the international steering committee for the Global Action to Prevent War project meeting in Berlin last week.

  We propose putting al Qaeda personnel - perhaps some of the ones the U.S. is holding now in Guantanamo Bay or Afghanistan if we can't get bin Laden or Zawahiri - on public international trial. We believe they will condemn themselves out of their own mouths as fanatical extremists, as did the Nazi defendants at the Nuremberg trials.

  We propose support for efforts to develop an Islamic indictment of al Qaeda actions - mainstream Islam prohibits both attacks on civilians and suicide.

  Above all, we propose modern secular education. The tenets of radical Islam cannot stand up to modern secular education, especially history."

  http://www.fcnl.org/issues/pea_dean.htm

  I, for one, am not getting a lot out of the "he said-she said" game going on right now.  

  What are we going to do to accomplish a long-term reduction of radical Islam's ability to attract support?

  by RichRandal on Sat Apr 03, 2004 at 05:00:00 PM PDT