Condoleezza Rice (search) says she would like nothing more than to testify before the commission probing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
But President Bush's national security adviser said Sunday she can't testify because of White House rules. "There is an important principle involved here: It is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress."
Condi conundrum: How would you solve it?
A sample of your responses:
I think Dr. Rice should stand firm and not testify publicly. Never break a set standard. The committee should release her closed door comments.
Rice has already testified! Could testify again under oath behind closed doors.
Vero Beach, FL
No DR Rice should not testify in public. This is just a ploy to get her in front of the public and ask questions that she can not answer due to national security. When she refused to answer she would be accused by the Democrats of a cover up.
The committee has heard from her. The public doesn't need to. Too much is already broadcast to the terrorist.
Get over it! Drop it! Clarke did not testify in front of the Senate in 1999 for the same exact Executive Privilege reason about the Y2K junk! Look it up and get over it!
This story will not go away until you STOP making it a story!
Whether she Does or not is not as important as ALLOW THE QUESTIONERS TO ASK QUESTIONS AND NOT MAKE SPEECHES
This whole Condi Rice public testimony thing stinks of politics. Didn't she answer the commissions questions? Hasn't she been forthcoming with regard to the issues? It's not at all about getting information - it is about a power struggle between Democrats and Republicans. It once again is much ado about nothing.
Traverse City, MI
Send your comments to: email@example.com
- Note: The views and opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of FOX News or its subsidiaries