Can they find out the real reason he took our soldiers to Iraq?
2006-12-09 01:07:53 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
You betcha
2006-12-09 01:09:36 · answer #1 · answered by MsFancy 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
nicely, there are a team of questions right here, so in my prevalent perverse way (no longer interior the DatelineSence) i will answer the lat one first. bill did his terrific to avert attesting below oath. He lost. Ther are 3 subject concerns in contact interior the testimony being required. a million)That that's public, so as that no longer in straightforward terms the investigators, however the yankee human beings ahve the oppertunity to video exhibit the demeanor of the respondents. The white homestead has wisely surmised that this would possibly not bypass nicely for them. 2)that that's below oath, so as that the respondent could be prosecuted in the event that they lie 3)that that's recorded, so as that comparisons between the testimony and the information being subpoena'ed could be made. of direction, with an somewhat conservative splendid courtroom in place, I even have my doubts that the White homestead willbe compelled to grant this testimony. there is not any actual provision for "government privilege" interior the form, so the priority right here is that compelling testimony might volume to a minimum of one branch of the government interfereing with yet another branch. of direction, in the two the Nixon and Clinton circumstances, the Supremes (the courtroom, no longer the 60's making a music team) rulled that compelling testimony did no longer violate the form, so the courtroom might might desire to locate flaws in those judgements, to avert the testimony of White homestead officers.
2016-10-14 08:11:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Total waste of money. He's an established liar already. Where are the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq?
2006-12-09 10:10:05 · answer #3 · answered by nhk_5 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The lie detector only works on people, that too if the person subconsciously knows they are lying; the detectors are not for parrots..
2006-12-09 01:41:25 · answer #4 · answered by bloodaxer 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You don't even need a lie detector to know if he is lying when he is standing infront of you.
He will let you know when he is lying.
The problem is you did'nt pay attention when he is talking to you in planet of apes.
Try this one "The winner takes it all" and the loser standing tall.
So is he lying out there in planet of apes.
He is just at loss blurr and stranded like everyone else in planet of apes.
2006-12-09 02:33:07 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You would never be able to get the President of America to sit down and prove innocence. He has lied proffesionally - it comes with being leader - so the test would never be completely secure, he could pay his way out as well.
So No, sorry, no possibly logical.
2006-12-09 01:19:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ha! Do you think a polygraph would reveal anything? The man's a professional liar, a real con artist. In fact, I think he's lied so much that I don't think even *he* can distinguish fact from fiction!! Reason can't penetrate his addled brain.
2006-12-09 01:16:41 · answer #7 · answered by FL LMT 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Technology of lie detectors is flawed.
2006-12-09 13:05:16 · answer #8 · answered by szhob 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course they can, but no one will. The difference is semantic. Can: yes, will: no.
It's like, "Can I go to the bathroom?" Can you? You may....
They won't, because the office of "President" automatically commands some degree of trust and respect. Whether or not it should is another argument.
2006-12-09 01:20:22 · answer #9 · answered by suzykew70 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
why cant they cant you put anyone on a lie detector?
why else would he send troops to iraq?
do you not want t be protected?
what would you do if you were president?watch troopsplay scrabble and drinktea?
2006-12-09 01:20:08 · answer #10 · answered by super nerd 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋