Nursing hopes that Fitz will take down "Big Time" Dick?

[swag]

Jane Hamsher is too:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005/10/dick-cheney-perjury-bitches-perjury.html

Cheney was interviewed by Fitzgerald last year under oath. That would make it perjury to tell a lie. Although Republican logic tells us that perjury is only a crime if you're getting a blow job in the bargain, a legitimate US attorney might not see it that way.

What indication do we have that Cheney lied? Well, if Cheney he had told the truth when he was interviewed last year, i.e., that he was Scooter Libby's source, Fitzgerald would not have needed to threaten Judy Miller and Matt Cooper with jail in order to counter Scooter Libby's testimony that he first heard about Valerie Plame's identity from journalists.

(I'm not nursing such hopes. And neither is http://atrios.blogspot.com , from whom this link and other blessing flow. But it's fun to think about.)

[deadparrot]

1. So he was under oath?

I hadn't heard for sure.

[pacalo]

2. Same here!

I was under the impression both he & * were not under oath when they testified for Fitzgerald. Plus, the grand jury wasn't present.

[rodeodance]

5. I do not think Cheney was under oath.

[swag]

8. NYT says he was sworn.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5159352&mesg_id=5159375

[pacalo]

11. The author of the blog said she would check that out...

Update: Everyone seems to be concerned that the Times may have gotten the "under oath" thing wrong. My inclination is to believe the Times is being VERY CAREFUL about this shit at this point in the game, but I promise to check it out tomorrow and report back. Regardless of whether Cheney was under oath or not, lying to Fitzgerald would still be a crime.

[aquart]

14. And the NYT is never wrong, of course.

Not for the last ten minutes, anyway?

[swag]

15. Apparently you didn't read the disclaimer in the link provided.

[swag]

4. NYT says he was.

Of course we know that what they have to say must be viewed skeptically, but that's what they say.

http://nytimes.com/2005/10/24/politics/24cnd-leak.html?ei=5094&en=db7d02c93e5913ef&hp=&ex=1130212800&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

Lawyers involved in the case said they had no indication that Mr. Fitzgerald was considering charging Mr. Cheney with wrongdoing. Mr. Cheney was interviewed under oath by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what the vice president told Mr. Fitzgerald about the conversation with Mr. Libby or when Mr. Fitzgerald first learned of it.

But the evidence of Mr. Cheney's direct involvement in the effort to learn more about Mr. Wilson is sure to intensify the political pressure on the White House in a week of high anxiety among Republicans about the potential for the case to deal a sharp blow to Mr. Bush's presidency.

[deadparrot]

7. Thanks.

I was listening to Malloy, and he said he didn't know. That was the last I'd heard of it.

[rodeodance]

10. Thanks for this. I was wrong as I had always thought he was not under

oath.

[leveymg]

3. Cheney wasn't sworn but he can still be nailed for False Statements

(Obstruction of Justice, USC 1001), which is a felony. Same with Dubya.

[swag]

6. NYT says he was sworn.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5159352&mesg_id=5159375

[leveymg]

16. Very well, then Perjury it is.

I'll take that!

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 79 > § 1621 Prev | Next

§ 1621. Perjury generally


Release date: 2005-08-03

Whoever—
(1) having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or
(2) in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true;
is guilty of perjury and shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by law, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. This section is applicable whether the statement or subscription is made within or without the United States.

OR

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 79 > § 1623 Prev | Next

§ 1623. False declarations before grand jury or court


Release date: 2005-08-03

(a) Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code) in any proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly makes any false material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to contain any false material declaration, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

[TahitiNut]

9. It's http://atrios.blogspot.com/ ... (no 2nd 's')

:shrug: Copy'n'paste are your friends.

[swag]

12. Thanks for the correction.

I sit corrected.

[swag]

13. Fineman says Chaney was not under oath. Who's right and who's wrong?

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9741470/

[samplegirl]

17. Hes pretty insulated

alot of people to take the bullet for him.