Did Bush Perjure Himself Before The Grand Jury On June 24, 2004?

[ThomWV]

Could it be that it is testimony that Bush gave that was false and what we are really seeing is efforts to present a strong case of an indictment of perjury against him? It is just a little hard to imagine the jailing of a Reporter over a Deputy Chief of Staff, but I imagine a good Prosecutor would go to any legal length if the corrupt party was the man at the very top. It would certainly explain a lot.

[cynatnite]

1. He wasn't under oath

:grr:

[cally]

5. I forget when Bush testified

Do you remember who said he wasn't under oath or how you know that?

[cynatnite]

9. I thought the OP was referring to when Fitzgerald went to the WH

shrub and cheney were spoken to, but there was a big deal made about not being under oath.

[Sparkly]

10. Found a link, and you're right

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3668-2004Jun24.html

So did he never testify under oath?

[cynatnite]

13. bush lied to Fitzgerald

He didn't want to be nailed for lying under oath.

If he had nothing to hide, he would have done it under oath.

[Sparkly]

7. Are you sure?

If he wasn't, why wasn't he?!?

[ThomWV]

8. What Possible Difference Could That Make?

How can a person speak before a Grand Jury and not be compelled to tell the truth? How can the President of the United States, acting inhis official capacity, every not be compelled by his office to tell the truth. On what day did it become acceptable for the President when acting in his official capacity to lie at all about anything?

[Cocoa]

18. he didn't appear before the Grand Jury

[ClintonTyree]

11. Didn't bush and cheney testify together?

Or was that another inquiry into their shady dealings? I know they testified together for something, bush couldn't handle it alone. Or was that the 9/11 investigation? There's been so many fuck-ups by these idiots it's hard to keep them sorted out.

[cynatnite]

14. I'm sure they were together

What I'd like to know is if rover was there :evilgrin:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

15. He and Cheney testified together before the 9/11 Independent Commission

and NOT under oath.

[orpupilofnature57]

2. dOES sHRUB DO ANYTHING BUT PURGE, YOU, ME,IRAQ????

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Very likely

Bu$h and a few others I would guess.

Rove for sure and who knows who else.

[lildreamer316]

4. That's assuming someone has some serious balls.

I mean, I know the administration has taken its hits, but it just now started to let go of the stranglehold on the press (or they yanked away; whatever) I think they might still have too much of an intimitdation factor this early on. Here's hoping you're right, though.

[Sanity Claws]

6. He didn't testify in front of a grand jury

he spoke to the prosecutor. I doubt he was under oath. I imagine the most that come out of that is an obstruction of justice charge.

[Wickerman]

12. though he wasn't technically under oath he has lied to the American people

but, as is often cited, when this pResident lied, folks have died. When the last President lied, a dress didn't get to the dry cleaners.

[satya]

16. According to anotheryellowdog's post, the prez is always under oath.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4032493&mesg_id=4032902

<snip>
An official such as the president does not need to take a special oath to become subject to the penalties of perjury. (my emphasis) He took an oath, by Art. II Sec. 1 Cl. 8, to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States" and to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States" to the best of his ability. While he holds that office, he is always under oath, and lying at any time constitutes perjury (my emphasis) if it is not justified for national security.

<snip>

Now, I've never thought of $hrub as a legitimate president, but if this is true, I'll rethink my position. :evilgrin:

[Peace Patriot]

17. Bush is not "the man at the very top."

"...if the corrupt party was the man at the very top." --ThomWV

-----

I suspect that the outing of Plame was the main goal all along--to disable an experienced CIA agent with covert eyes and ears on WMDs around the globe, in order to prevent detection of nefarious Bush Cartel WMD activities; that Cheney is directly responsible for the outing (dirtiest arms dealer in the Bush Cartel); that Rove agreed to take the fall, if necessary (with promises of a pardon and rich rewards); and that everything else--the "talking points" we are hearing--is a cover story to point away from Cheney (like, he didn't okay Wilson going to Niger, it was somehow all Plame's idea--no chance in hell that mission could have gone forward without Cheney's personal okay). I suspect that the Niger mission was a wild goose chase; Cheney knew nothing would be found; and once he had the Wilson angle to play with, he deliberately put the Iraq/Niger nuke charge into Bush's SOTU speech, to goad Wilson and create the cover story--Rove revenge--to disable Plame.

British chief weapons inspector David Kelly was being "suicided" in England at about the same time that Plame was being outed here--summer '03. There is a common figure in these two events. Judith Miller.

Miller is suspected of laundering Valerie Plame's identity to other reporters, to protect Cheney, Libby and/or Rove. She also had quite close connections to David Kelly, including being one of the last people he corresponded with.

See
"More about Judith Miller" (Miller/Plame/David Kelly)
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/7/3/17138/30618

My suspicion: There was a plot to plant WMDs in Iraq. That was Bush/Blair's most pressing political need in summer '03 (a WMD find in Iraq). I suspect that Kelly got onto it--and that that's what caused his change of heart about the Iraq intel that Blairites had messed with ("sexed up"). Kelly supported the invasion, then whistleblew on the intel AFTERWARDS. It feels like something happened to change his viewpoint. A plot to plant WMDs in Iraq would do it. It would have offended his sense of honor and outraged him (my read on his character). He started whistleblowing. All hell broke loose among the Blairites over the actually rather mild things he was saying (that they'd "sexed up" the docs). Then he turned up dead, under highly suspicious circumstances. When you read the facts about his death they really sort of scream at you: "assassination." What would have prompted that? Not what he said to the BBC, but something worse that he knew.

One of his last emails was to Judith Miller--the one in which he's worried about "many dark actors playing games." She wrote a news article about his death for the NYT and didn't mention this email, nor her close connection to him (he was a major source for her book "Germs"). I also suspect that she put words in the mouth of a dead man, in that article, to support her own activities and views, re WMDs in Iraq. (Notice what she reports he said "to associates," the parts that aren't in quotes.)

See
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/scibaneprolif.html
"scientist was bane of proliferators" - judith miller 7/21/03

Spinning a theory here, of course. Most of it speculation. Bear in mind, also, that Joseph Wilson recently stated that his wife and Judith Miller are both "collateral damage" in the Bush regime campaign to silence dissent. Nothing he has said supports my theory. Still, I think it's useful to HAVE a theory--a working hypothesis with which to evaluate Rove "talking points" and "pod people" spin--as well as major developments.

For Cheney arms dealing, see
"Plame...the tip of the iceberg..." (Plame maybe investigating Cheney arms deals when they busted her CIA weapons op)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2178477#2180220

I have no speculation on what the connection between the Plame outing and the Kelly "suicide" might be, nor on Miller's role in either--except that the coinicidence of these two WMD experts being disabled, one by outing, one by death, within three days of each other, seems more than chance, and Judith Miller being possibly involved in the Plame outing, and peripherally involved in Kelly's death as the recipient of the "dark actors" email, also seems...what? Resonant? Red flaggy? --at the least needing further investigation. (Novak outed Plame on 7/14/03. Kelly died on 7/17/03.)