> cHat wrote: > No where in that definition (or in yours, actually) does it say > anything about deceiving the citizens of the nation.
Could be, but then we're just interpreting dictionary references. I'd like to leave the indictment analysis to a bipartisan congressional investigation committee. But you might be right. > Congressional > members swear a different oath, Based on those oaths I'd say that the President and his staff are guilty of sedition and failure to investigate by Congress is a violation of their oath of office. But, again, I'd favor leaving the illegality of the fraud, and the severity of the punishment, up to an investigative committee and the judicial branch. If an Oval Office BJ is impeachable, I'd think falsifying documents to fool the country into supporting a war is, at a minimum, punitively equivalent. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:265759 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
