Yours:
The White House must be quietly thanking Mark Foley for the timing of the pedophilia scandal. If not for Foley, we might be talking about how Condoleezza Rice has completely lost what remained of her credibility. Along with the Foley scandal, we should be discussing whether perjury charges should be filed against Rice regarding her 9/11 Commission testimony and whether she was criminally negligent.
Mine:
The Whitehouse must be secretly thanking Mark Foley for the timing of his sex scandal. If not for Foley's predatory antics, we might instead be talking about how Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has lost what little remained of her credibility. If not for Foley's shame-induced resignation, we might instead be exploring whether Secretary Rice is guilty of perjury.
Comments: I changed "quietly" to "secretly" because it implies a greater sense of skullduggery and deception. I changed "pedophilia scandal" to "sex scandal," because some people might not consider the pages to be sufficiently young to qualify as "pedophilia," and if that charge is disputed then it distracts from the rest of your argument. I changed "if not for Foley" to "if not for Foley's predatory antics" because it highlights his wrongdoing and reinforces the creepiness of his methods. Also, the use of "predator" resonates with NBC's endlessly ongoinging "To Catch a Predator" series.
I changed "whether perjury charges should be filed against Rice" to "whether Rice is guilty of perjury," because it's more immediate and, I think, packs more of a punch. The word "guilty" is powerful even if it's only hypothetical (at this point). I think that you can drop the bit about "criminally negligent" because it seems too vague and metaphorical, especially since you don't explicitly return to it in the piece.
I used "shame-induced resignation" because it plays well against your closing paragraph (see below).
Yours:
In her testimony to the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if they had known an attack was coming, they would have, "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.
In reality, Dr. Rice did nothing to stop 9/11.
Mine:
In her sworn testimony before the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if the Bush administration had known that an attack was coming, they would have "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.
Comments: I think that it's useful to name the Bush administration here, rather than refer simply to "they," because you implicate the rest of Bushco. You can eliminate the closing statement ("In reality, Dr. Rice...") because it's obvious from what comes next, and the passage about Black and Tenet packs more punch if it follows immediately.
Yours:On July 10, 2001, the two top CIA people, George Tenet and J. Cofer Black, urgently warned her, Attorney General John Ashcroft and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that a terror attack was imminent. Black even said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head."
So serious was this warning that Ashcroft switched from flying commercial aircraft to private chartered ones.
Mine:
On July 10, 2001 J. Cofer Black and George Tenet, then director of the CIA, urgently warned Rice, Attorney General Ashcroft, and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that a terrorist attack was imminent. Black later reflected that they spelled out a clear and convincing case, yet Rice still failed to act. Ashcroft got the message, though, and as a result he began taking only private, chartered flights, rather than flying in commercial aircraft.
Comments: "top CIA people" is too colloquial; it's enough to name the two men and proceed from there. Change "terror" to "terrorist," because they're two different things, and because Bushco tries to equate them whenever possible. Remove the quote about the gun to the head, because it comes across a trifle too literal in this context, and it may be perceived as a vague threat from a ranting Liberal. It's sufficient to underscore that the warning was clear--clear enough to scare Ashcroft into taking private flights!
Yours:
Though she first denied the meeting, Rice now says she cannot recall the details.
If she does not step down for perjury, Dr. Rice should at least have the shame to step down for her incompetence.
Mine:
Recently Rice denied that the meeting took place. Then she changed her story and said that she didn't recall the details of the meeting.
If her perjury doesn't force her from office, then her clear incompetence should shame her into resigning.
Comments: I feel that it's useful to reiterate that she changed her story, since we know how Conservatives love the "flip-flopper" label. And I think that "shame" as a verb is stronger here than as a direct object. Also, "step down" is a bit tepid, especially if we can use "shame" and "resign" to echo Foley's "shame-induced resignation" mentioned above.
=====================
It's a good LTTE in any case. You are free to adopt or ignore any of my suggestions with no obligation express or implied.
Good luck!