Condi can't hold candle to Clarke

Who says Karl Rove is so smart? We just witnessed one of the biggest screw-ups in White House history.

In a stunning flip-flop, President Bush caved in to political pressure and allowed National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice to testify in public, under oath, before the 9-11 Commission. At the same time, in another reversal, Bush and Vice President Cheney agreed to testify before the entire 10-person Commission, and not just the chairman and vice-chairman, as they had previously insisted.

TRENDING: Obama's claim that he broke a racist classmate's nose is met with skepticism

For months, Bush refused to cooperate with the 9-11 Commission. Initially he opposed its creation. Next he put Henry Kissinger, a man nobody trusts, in charge. When Doctor K backed out, Bush refused to turn over key White House documents. Then he barred Condi Rice from testifying, claiming that the "separation of powers" prevented senior White House aides from testifying.

The president was either lying or uninformed. According to the Library of Congress, senior White House aides have testified before Congress – in public, under oath – at least 20 times since World War II. President Carter allowed his national security adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1980. Sandy Berger, Clinton's NSC Chief, testified in 1994. And President Ford himself appeared before a congressional committee to explain his pardon of Richard Nixon.

Ignoring history wasn't Bush's only mistake. By stiffing the 9-11 Commission, he was also stiffing the American people. For all Americans, Sept. 11 is a day like no other. It transcends politics. Americans still wonder how 19 terrorists could outsmart the most powerful nation on earth. We want answers, not some silly game of White House cover-up. By refusing to allow Rice to testify, Bush looked like he had something to hide.

It's good that Condi Rice will finally testify in public. But it's too late to repair the political damage done to Bush. From now on, it will be Rice's word against that of Richard Clarke, the president's own point man on terrorism. Under both Clinton and George W. Bush, Clarke was like Paul Revere, running through the White House shouting, "The terrorists are coming!" Clinton and Sandy Berger listened; Bush and Condi Rice did not.

President Bush wants to run for re-election on one issue: the war on terror. His wants to send one message: We're at war. I'm commander in chief. And I've been tough on terrorists from day one. Too bad for Bush. Richard Clarke shot that plan down in flames.

No matter what Rice tells the commission, there will no longer be only one version of the war on terror before the American people this year. There will be two: the political spin of Bush and Rice, and the blunt truth of Richard Clarke. Here's where they differ on those critical months leading up to Sept. 11.

Bush-Rice say the administration made terrorism a top priority. Clarke says it was an "important" priority, but not an "urgent one." President Bush himself admitted to Bob Woodward: "I was not on point. I didn't feel that sense of urgency." No anti-terrorist actions were taken before Sept. 11.

Bush-Rice say they did all they could. Yet in January 2001, Richard Clarke asked Rice for a Cabinet-level meeting on terrorism and a presidential briefing. She didn't schedule one until eight months later, on Sept. 4. Clarke finally got to brief the president – the evening of Sept. 11, when he returned to Washington after the attacks.

Bush-Rice say they planned, from the beginning, to use military action against al-Qaida. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage agrees with Clarke that any military option was only added later, after Sept. 11.

Bush-Rice insist nobody imagined that terrorists would use hijacked airplanes as weapons. Clarke feared exactly that scenario during the 1996 Atlanta Olympics and put an anti-aircraft defense in place. On Aug. 6, 2001, at his ranch in Crawford, Texas, President Bush was warned that al-Qaida might use planes to attack targets inside the United States. He did nothing.

On those and other key points, there are competing versions of what went on inside the Bush White House before Sept. 11. According to Condi Rice, they were on the job. According to Richard Clarke, they were asleep at the switch.

Now it's up to us to decide which one to believe. Before you decide, remember: Bush and Rice are the same ones who told us Saddam Hussein had WMD. Voters beware.