On Mar 22, 2007, at 6:24 AM, Pete Theisen wrote: > On Wednesday 21 March 2007 9:56 pm, Robert Calco wrote: >> On Mar 21, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Ed Leafe wrote: >>> Let me get this straight: Bush's current and former staff members >>> can testify before Congress, but there can't be any sort of record >>> kept, and the testimony can't be under oath? >>> >>> Let's assume for a minute that there is no public record of their >>> testimony; that it's all done in a confidential, sealed manner. Why >>> not under oath? I can think of one and only one difference that >>> would >>> make: they couldn't be prosecuted for lying. >> >> Don't forget another possibly more charitable rationale: they can't >> be put in prison for not remembering some detail. > <snip> >> Pure nonsense, all of it. It's disgusting. >> >> - Bob > > Hi Bob! > > Interesting post, thanks. Do you think he'll respond to it? >
No. He's not interested in forwarding any discussion that doesn't assume a priori that President Bush and Republicans are evil incarnate, or doesn't make him look like a latter-day, born-again Bertrand Russell. - Bob > :-) > > -- > Regards, > > Pete > http://www.pete-theisen.com/ > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
