"NEWSWEEK: Some 9/11 Commission Staffers 'Flat Out Didn't Believe' Cheney Called Bush to Get His Sign Off On Shoot-Down Order of U.S. Airliners"
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040620/nysu011a_1.html

i mentioned yesterday that condi seemed to somehow transport from texas to dc to overhear/confirm *that* phcall. now it seems some commissioners arent exactly sure that the discussion took place. heres the odd thing - both scooter and lynne cheney were in the room but couldnt verify the conversation. which seems to mean that either condi was prepared to lie, where the others werent, or more likely, lynne & scooter were interviewed before condi, and before they fabricated the story about the phcall. i also previously pointed out that the idea of 43 on the cellphone seemed to be a plan to get around the fact that the phcall wasnt recorded. the interesting thing then is, of all the lies theyve told, why were they so desperate to cover up this one that they went against lynne/scooters testimony, and had condi defying physics? we also hear repeatedly that cheneys orders didnt get to the pilots anyway. of all the wartcrimes and of all the lies they have told, im not sure why they seem to be going to such extremes about covering up this one.

if they did happen to shoot down F93, then maybe the legalities require that only the pres can order the shootdown. but it still seems to be unnecessarily extravagant. even if the phcall was totally fabricated, why not just say 'its the veeps and the pres' word against the commission'?

and for the record, if it all is in fact a lie, we can learn some lessons from the way the presented the story http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5233007/
"The Vice President’s military aide told us he believed the Vice President spoke to the President just after entering the conference room, but he did not hear what they said. Rice, who entered the conference room shortly after the Vice President and sat next to him, recalled hearing the Vice President inform the President that, “Sir, the CAPs are up. Sir, they’re going to want to know what to do.” Then she recalled hearing him say, “Yes sir.” She believed this conversation occurred a few minutes, perhaps five, after they entered the conference room."

there are indications in the use of language that its more fiction than fact - things like 'sat next to him' and 'yes sir' and 'just after entering the conference room' are the output of fiction writers, not journos reporting facts.

it seems to me they think they are most vulnerable on this issue for some reason - but i cant work out why.