During her April 8, 2004, appearance before the 9/11 Commission, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice discussed the infamous Presidential Daily Brief of August 6, 2001. At the time, the document was still classified. We did, however, know the title: “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike In US.”
Rice was asked by commission member Richard Ben-Veniste: “Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the August 6 PDB warned against possible attacks in this country?”
Keeping in mind that Rice was under oath, read her reply:
“You said, did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.”
In the continuing testy exchange, she reiterated: “Commissioner, this was not a warning. This was a historic memo...”
Then she gets specific about how nonspecific the memo was: “But I can also tell you that there was nothing in this memo that suggested that an attack was coming on New York or Washington, D.C.”
So here we have the President's top adviser on security swearing before God and country that the memo “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike In US” did not discuss Bin Laden's plans to strike in the US.
It seemed absolutely ridiculous, but we had to take her word for it. Not for long, though. Two days later — under intense pressure — the White House miraculously released the document, 99 percent uncensored. Some of the short memo did discuss the past (this was the “historical information” part) but only as a way of emphasizing Bin Laden's continuing willingness to attack America. The briefing says that this illustrates his patience, his tactic of planning strikes for years. His earlier plots were just the first part of his plans to attack inside the US itself, the memo warns. In bold italics, it blares: “Al-Qa'ida members — including some who are US citizens — have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.”
This all builds up to the crescendo of the last two paragraphs, which explicitly warn that plots are underway:
... FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijacking or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE [United Arab Emirates] in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.
This is the “historical” memo that contained “no new threat information.” The briefing that “did not warn of attacks inside the United States,” certainly not anything about an attack on New York.
When mere mortals lie under oath, it's called perjury. When National Security Advisers lie under oath to Congressionally-mandated commissions, it's called...nothing, really. Because no one mentions it.
It's worth noting that Bush also lied about the warning memo, claiming that the “PDB said nothing about an attack on America.”