Yesterday, Senator Frist charged Richard Clarke with perjury, imputing<\/p>\n
extremely dishonorable motives to this career public servant. If the Senator is correct, which is certainly possible, then he should produce proof and call for Mr.<\/p>\n
Clarke to be prosecuted for perjury. If he is not correct, then Senator Frist’s denunciation reminds me of a famous moment in the US Senate, fifty years ago: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
| \n I am equally troubled that someone would sell a book, trading on their<\/p>\n former service as a government insider with access to our nation?s most<\/p>\n valuable intelligence, in order to profit from the suffering that this<\/p>\n nation endured on September 11, 2001. … Mr. President, I do not know<\/p>\n if Mr. Clarke?s motive for these charges is partisan gain, personal profit,<\/p>\n self promotion, or animus because of his failure to win a promotion in<\/p>\n the Bush Administration. … Mr. Clarke has told two entirely different stories<\/p>\n under oath. In July 2002, in front of the Congressional Joint Inquiry<\/p>\n on the September 11 attacks, Mr. Clarke testified under oath that the<\/p>\n Administration actively sought to address the threat posed by al Qaeda<\/p>\n during its first seven months in office. Mr. President, it is one thing<\/p>\n for Mr. Clarke to dissemble in front of the media. But if he lied under<\/p>\n oath to the United States Congress it is a far more serious matter. As<\/p>\n I mentioned, the intelligence committee is seeking to have Mr. Clarke?s<\/p>\n previous testimony declassified so as to permit an examination of Mr.<\/p>\n Clarke’s two different accounts. … Mr Clarke can and will answer for<\/p>\n his own conduct ? but that is all. <\/p>\n Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, March 26, 2004<\/p>\n<\/td>\n | \n\n |