Bush himself was questioned by Fitzgerald in the Oval Office on

[Logiola]

June 24, 2004.

is this normal to do in the Oval office? would he of been under oath?

[clydefrand]

1. I don't think he or Cheney were under oath when they talked

with Fitzgerald at the same time, of course, so they could be sure to tell the same story.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

2. If I recall, Bush and Cheney both agreed to speak but not under oath

[Logiola]

5. so no chance of perjury on them.. smart fellows eh..

[lancdem]

8. They were not in front of the grand jury

but they were under oath, I believe.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. Are you sure you aren't

mixing that info up with the agreement they made not to be under oath for the 9-11 Whitewash Commission?

I don't believe you can get away with that excuse when you are giving evidence for a grand jury investigation.

[indepat]

3. Me thinks this president says nothing under oath or at least I can

recall no such incident.

[lancdem]

4. I'm pretty sure it was under oath

and they were interviewed separately. Now they weren't under oath when they spoke to the 9/11 commission, but this is different.

[tk2kewl]

6. do you think this is why Fitz is pushing hard...

he was given a song and dance by bush/cheney

[napi21]

7. Shrub and Dick did the same thing with the 9/11 commission.

They don't believe in this "under oathh" stuff! Can get ya in trouble, ya know!

[lancdem]

10. If I remember correctly they were under oath

Maybe someone can do a google search on this?

[Jacobin]

9. Lying to the FBI is a crime in and of itself

The secretary of state of louisiana got 18 months on a bogus conviction for that. I don't know if lying to a federal prosecutor is a crime or not.

Even if you are not under oath.

Could be interesting

[PDittie]

11. No

This was a particular bone of contention at the time; whether he would be sworn or not.

Neither he nor Cheney was sworn.

I would like to know if Alberto Gonzales and/or the private attorney Bush has consulted (Jim Sharp) was present. I feel certain they were...

[RobertSeattle]

12. Oaths are only for Democrat Presidents

Didn't you get the Memo?

[Logiola]

13. not under oath

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

he was not under oath but as scotty says "Scott McClellan, adding that Bush was "pleased to do his part"

[lancdem]

16. Thank you for clearing that up

[mike_c]

14. whether he was under oath or not, it would be damaging to learn...

...that he looked a federal prosecutor in the eye and lied, especially after all the noise he made about cooperating with the investigation. That would make him an explicit and known party to the cover-up.

[zbird]

15. If they can't get him on perjury, could they get him on obstruction?

I'm not an attorney, nor did I stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night... just asking.

[PDittie]

20. Yes

But actually obstruction of justice is more likely Cheney's biggest concern:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4080946

Anybody seen or heard from Dick since this scandal broke open last week? Have you noticed how he always seems to disappear at moments like these?

The Invisible Man

[Logiola]

17. interesting facts on lying to a federal prosecutor

http://sol.lp.findlaw.com/articles/fbi.html

[mike_c]

18. findlaw is great....

That citation would appear to settle the matter.

[Bethany Rockafella]

19. Was Dick there to hold his hand?

[Gyre]

22. prosecutors do not do this

if any part of the interview could/would be used as evidence. It makes them a witness and another prosecutor has to do any trial that that evidence is going to be used in.

Gyre