From Reuters and CNN -

The head of the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks urged Condoleezza Rice on Sunday to testify before it in public but the White House national security adviser repeated her refusal to do so.

“There’s an important principle involved here. We have separate branches of government — the legislative branch and the executive branch,” Rice said. “This commission, it takes its authority, derives its authority, from the Congress, and it is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress…”

“Nothing would be better, from my point of view, than to be able to testify,” she said… “I would really like to do that. But …This is a matter of policy.”

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, speaking to reporters Sunday, said Rice “would be a superb witness. She is anxious to testify. The president would dearly love to have her testify.”

But the administration’s lawyers have determined that her testifying “would leave the institution different than it was,” he said.

_____________________________________

“We’re just sick about it!” exclaimed White House spokesman Scott McClellan at today’s briefing. “The President was all likem ‘Wow, it would be super duper if Condi could testify,’ but his lawyers were like, ‘No, she’s not allowed because of, you know, precedents and stuff,’ and we were all like ‘No way!’ but they were like, ‘Way!’ So it’s a bummer.”

“Absolutely,” agreed Vice President Dick Cheney, making the rounds on Sunday. “It’s a shame, but we have to settle for her making the case on the news, on talk shows, in editorials, and at public appearances. So the real shame about that is that Condi doesn’t get to take an oath, which is something she’d really, really love to do.”

At issue was the legal precedent that would be set by a sitting National Security Advisor testifying in public bedore “a Congressy kinda thing,” White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales explained.

“I hate to be the heavy here,” he said. “But it’s a slippery slope. One minute it’s okay for the National Security Advisor to publicly testify before Congress concerning the most devastating and unprecedented attack ever on American soil, and the next thing you know she’s being compelled to testify about private thoughts that the President shared with her concerning state dinner menu choices. Where do you draw the line?”

“It’s a sacrifice, but future National Security Advisors will thank us,” concluded Gonzales. “What a pity, though. Condi’s exactly the kind of person that we’d want testifying under oath and having to explain some of her more strident and questionable statements while opening herself up to the possibility of perjury - I mean, she’s perfect for that kinda stuff. But the law is the law, I suppose.”