3:28 pm (PDT) Thursday, April 8, 2004

Flash Analysis of Condoleeza Rice's Testimony before the 9/11 Commission

Condoleeza Rice is one of the most accomplished people, not to mention women, not to mention women of color I have ever seen. She is a brilliant scholar, a concert level pianist, articulate, hard-working and has attained heights of influence and power that are truly remarkable.

I was looking forward to seeing how this incredibly impressive individual would perform under the intense pressure and scrutiny of a televised hearing of the 9/11 Commission. She went in with several strikes against her: 1) The testimony of her former subordinate, Richard Clarke, that preceded her and in fact prompted her appearance was credible, damaging and put her on the defensive; 2) Her initial refusal to appear before the Commission raising suspicions that she had something to hide; 3) The Bush Administration's general slide in the opinion polls and the growing doubts about his war on terrorism. Yet, in spite of these strikes, I thought if anybody could perform well in these circumstances, it would be her.

Was I disappointed?

Well, that depends. Her performance was overall good. It was a little unsteady in some ways but great in others. Was she effective? That too depends. Her side was aided by some tactical errors on the part of some of the Commissioners but ultimately, the Bush Administration may be damaged not by anything she did or said but by a title.

The aspects of her performance that struck me first were her apparent nervousness. She is usually the poster child for fluency and a model I hold up to my clients. It's been reported that in the Bush administration, she is kidded because she does not let a sentence leave her mouth that is not complete and grammatically correct. That was not the case here. Her vocalized pauses and strangled syntax were all the more glaringly obvious because of her existing reputation for fluidity. It made her appear nervous, slightly unprepared and at times defensive.

However, she was also firm, resolved, and tenaciously on message. When I have a chance to read the transcript, I bet I'll count the phrase "structural problems" at least 20 times. The Bush Administration has obviously felt it best to explain "how could this happen" by saying that the fragmented and uncooperative nature of our national intelligence structure was responsible. Dr. Rice did everything in her power to make sure that story was told in today's hearings. No matter what bites are picked by the media to air and re-air over the next couple of days, you can bet her message will be clear.

Dr. Rice was also aided by what I feel was a lack of judgment on the part of some of the Commissioners, most notably Democrats Richard Ben-Veniste and Bob Kerry. Both of these men choose to take a prosecutorial approach to the questioning which many will see as bullying, badgering or simply rude. This dynamic will most probably be leveraged by the fact that the media will select the most contentious bites to air. For the majority of the public who work during the day and didn't watch the entire testimony, these clips of white men grilling a woman of color will be all they see. I for one will be interested to see what the response is to these exchanges. There is no doubt that these men made their point and in fact, Ben-Veniste drew out what will probably be the headline of the hearing (I'll get to that presently) but we do like to see our public officials at least pretending to be civil, dignified, and even in this egalitarian modern age, chivalrous.

So, the testimony went well and the Bush Administration can relax a bit, right?

Wrong. I predict here and now that the most significant element of this hearing was one sentence that will be repeated over and over again by the media and by the opponents of Bush's policy. It is the one sentence of this hearing that has the most potential to damage the Bush Administration. The sentence is the title of a critical document, the PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing) of August 6, 2001 that Commissioner Ben-Veniste asked Dr. Rice to read aloud: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" This title is damaging in a few ways. First of all, though it could be read as a simple summary of what Bin-Laden has always wanted to do (Rice's explanation), it could also be read as a warning, precisely what Dr. Rice argues the briefing is not. Second, Ben-Veniste made it a point to stress that this title had not been released prior to his questioning, again highlighting suspicions that Rice and the Bush Administration have something to hide. Another reason why this one sentence could be very damaging is because the document in which it appears will be the source of repeated media attention as it is a crucial document the Commission is demanding be declassified. It won't just fade away as new news comes along, it and the impression that the Bush Administration was warned there would be an attack fully a month before it happened will be front and center for a while.

Condi put up a game fight but she may be done in by a title.

Click here for analysis of other important political speeches.