Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why isn't AG Gonzales testifying under Oath?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
greenpagan Donating Member (108 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:15 PM
Original message
Why isn't AG Gonzales testifying under Oath?
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Because he's a lying sack of shit traitor like George and Dick?
Just a guess, mind you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
11. Yep and you win, a cookie!...n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyRingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. I didn't know there were snacks...
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 03:45 PM by JohnnyRingo
I would have jumped in and answered with the obvious first.
...dammit

On Edit:
The real question to me is:
Why do we allow this admin to consistantly testify casually, like they're chatting in their kitchens about our country's security?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I'm a sub teacher...
And I live by the rule of "bring enough for everyone"...so, cookies all around!!...:) I wish I had cable/satelitte...days like this makes me want to order Direct Tv .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyRingo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. And a very good sub, by all appearances.
My disdain for broadcast TV is such that I would give up my phone before I surrender my cable.
Watching reality shows and common denominator sit-coms would probably drive me out of the house during most of the day.

I would probably end up doing a lot more work around here when I was home, and would probably enjoy better health due to a more active lifestyle.

But can you really call it living without CSPAN, The Learning Channel, and Comedy Central?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Yes, very true...
I can get abc/cbs/nbc with the anntennae, and the programming blows...there isn't one show I look forward to seeing, and they all carry the most worthless sports...except cbs and college football, most of the time they are showing tennis/golf/nascar, and I really have zero interest in those shows. I love cspan, cspan II, comedy central, and a few others...at times, i wish i would just swallow the bullet and get direct tv...but anyways...:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guidod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. That's a pertty good guess.
Edited on Mon Feb-06-06 03:33 PM by guidod
He's also a DICK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemInDistress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. for the same reasons "Lunatic Stevens" wouldn't allow Big Oil
to testify under oath..LIES have a habit of coming back to bite you on your ass....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guidod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
26. The repuke committee members
won't let it happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. Specter wouldn't swear him in. It's that simple.
Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
4. The whole idea of "Oath" is outdated. So 1961. So Robert Frost - and
he is an evil poet. Anything that competes with the TV advertising must be stopped.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. He's a "conservative" with nothing to hide
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
6. To avoid a perjury rap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldtime dfl_er Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
7. haha
:rofl:

oh sorry was that a serious question????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. Everyone realizes it doesn't matter..he'll lie anyway...
Why waste time with an oath...winky, winky, nod, nod...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
melissinha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
9. Its a defense mechanism of a guilty individual
Cause he knows it will be perjury if he's proven to have lied.

To show that they are conducting oversight they needed to include him, but they have no intention of receiving truthful information if he doesn't take an oath because he probably wouldn't appear if told he would be under oath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
10. You won't believe what a Specter staffer just told me.
I called in on one of the TOLL FREE lines. A staffer answered. I asked why Mr. "Torture's Okay" wasn't sworn in, under oath. She said Specter had reviewed the statutes and determined that as an officer of the government, gonzales was in effect already sworn to tell the truth (!??!?!?!?!?!??!?!) simply by testifying to Congress.

Uhhh... yeeeeeeaaaaahhhhhhh... suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurrre...

I said, what if he's lying? She said he's technically already sworn to tell the truth. JEEEEZZZ. Let's be sure we remember that one, the next time one of our guys has to testify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loge23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. So is the idiot pres.
and look where that has got us!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. That's what Spooky's staffer told me, too...
That anyone testifying before congress is automatically under oath, whether they are sworn-in or not.

I complained that "swearing-in" would then still be a symbolic gesture for the American People to see on television, and that it is disingenuous and partisan of the senator to spare Gonzales the indignity or swearing on a bible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
incapsulated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. Are you questioning the honesty and integrity of our leaders?
Their righteousness is innate and beyond question, conferred upon them by our Glorious Leader.

Please step this way and have your papers in order....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrBenchley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
19. The culture of corruption.....
The attorney general won't testify under oath, and the chairman of the hearing won't try to swear him in....says it all, doesn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-06-06 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
20. Because Cheney could not do it with him. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Steve A Play Donating Member (638 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 02:52 AM
Response to Original message
22. The next time I'm called for jury duty
I'm going to refuse to be sworn in. If it's good enough for the AG, it's good enough for me. I'm going to tell the judge that "I'm going to give you the same answers whether I'm sworn in or not", and remind him of these hearings. :)

Steven P. :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluesplayer Donating Member (660 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 03:37 AM
Response to Original message
23. Bible shortage
Edited on Tue Feb-07-06 03:39 AM by Bluesplayer
With all the repubs taking oaths these days, there's been an epidemic of bibles bursting into flames.

(Could that be a sign of something?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realFedUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
24. jury duty
Edited on Tue Feb-07-06 11:34 AM by realFedUp
just did my duty and a whole room of potential
jurors were sworn in, whether we served on the panel
or not.
Maybe we need a real judge in Justice, not just
one who practiced real estate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kablooie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-07-06 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
25. They thought testifying as an Oaf was more appropriate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC