Condoleezza Rice and Executive Privilege
DLaycock at mail.law.utexas.edu
Tue Mar 30 09:25:08 PST 2004
I can understand in principle arguments why she should not testify
in public, although those arguments are hard to maintain when she is all
over the press. I cannot understand at all why if she testifies in
private, she cannot be under oath. That seems to be explicitly reserving
the right to lie; it is hard to imagine any other function.
The local radio here reports that Matt Drudge reported today that
the Clinton Administration refused to let Richard Clarke testify to a
Congressional committee on Y2K in 1999, when he was National Security
Advisor, invoking executive privilege. I have no idea what the
circumstances were, what the arguments were, or whether Drudge has the
facts right. I think Clarke was on the National Security staff; I don't
think he was ever National Security Advisor. That was Sandy Berger.
University of Texas Law School
727 E. Dean Keeton St.
Austin, TX 78705
dlaycock at mail.law.utexas.edu
More information about the Conlawprof