We need "them" to answer questions under oath. Period.

[Scout1071]

As far as I can tell, the President has not been forced to testify under oath for anything. He has only had "meetings" or "discussions". They very specifically and intentionally have gone out of their way not to place that hand on the Bible (ironic, isn't it?).

[Drum]

1. Absolutely!

Remember, playing around with M.Lewinsky didn't do it for Clinton...the denial under oath was the legal evidence neeeded for the legal procedure of impeachment. Unlike the 9/11 commission "chat" (hand in hand with his buddy Dick) the prez must be sworn (as well as un-wired and un-scripted!)

Can you BELIEVE all of that 5 years ago, and nothing happens to this bozo now???

[Catfight]

2. Very ironic bush is afraid of telling the truth under oath. It's amazing

there wasn't more outrage, but NOPE, America has turned a blind eye for bush for too long.

[Scout1071]

3. Get out the bible, ask him to raise his right hand and start

documenting.

He needs to be under oath. They've told so many lies, they will never be able to keep them straight. And whatever they do, Cheney in the room feeding him answers will NOT be acceptable.

[Is It Fascism Yet]

4. What you think Shrub would hesitate to lie? He does it so much he

doesn't even know the difference! This sociopath could pass a lie detector test, just from really having no conscience! Shrub would lie on a stack of bibles, now, if you could get him to swear on his bank statements, that'd be a more serious matter!

[Scout1071]

5. Yes, he would lie under oath. If we impeach for lying about a

blow-job under oath, then we sure as hell will impeach when we catch him in his lies that caused thousands to die.

[Is It Fascism Yet]

9. Never mind lying under oath, we impeach for treason too!

You know, if the oligarchy won't impeach him for treason, they won't impeach him for anything else either. Clearly the difference between Shrub and Clinton is that Shrub protects the "owner class" and so they protect him back. And guess what, all those senators and congressmen are "owner class". We already know of plenty of impeachable crimes, oaths won't help, call your senators and congressman today and everyday and demand impeachment, I do! When DU gets to Washington on Sept24, let us not call for the end of war, but for the end of the regime that is responsible for the war. When Shrub is gone, his successor will rush to end the war.

[cthrumatrix]

6. of course (with no ear piece)

[Mutley]

7. Gee, we all know what the RW would have said if Clinton

had refused to testify under oath. DAMN THAT CLENIS!

[Dr Fate]

8. We need "star" Democrats, ON TV saying that everyday.

Kerry, Hilary, Dean, Obama- WHERE AAARE YOOU????????????

[Scout1071]

10. We need the Dems to demand statements and questioning under

oath. Nothing less.

[im10ashus]

11. And you think they wouldn't lie?

Are you THAT gullible? They would lie. They have lied. They will continue to lie. Bible or no bible.

[Dr Fate]

12. Good. That is the point. Lying under oath is impeachable.

n/t

[Scout1071]

13. Let them lie. We will catch them. You know Shrub isn't smart enough

to keep his lies straight. Putting Bush in a room under oath with no Cheney would be like shootin' fish in a barrel.