Why was he allowed to testify without taking an oath? That is most unusual.
I remember that they let Gonzales testify that way, too, and what a liar he turned out to be.
HMMMMMM.... Listening on C-Span - did I just miss the swearing in or are we definitely being lied to?
2007-09-10 16:14:46 · 19 answers · asked by cassandra 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
How dare I? I'm an American Citizen, not a citizen of a military dictatorship. Get a grip on comrades.
2007-09-10 17:04:16 · update #1
Hey, you uninformed American citizens who love the boot of fascism on your face - Petraeus is required to TESTIFY before Congress, and that's what he's doing.
(3) Testimony before congress.—Prior to the submission of the President’s second report on September 15, 2007, and at a time to be agreed upon by the leadership of the Congress and the Administration, the United States Ambassador to Iraq and the Commander, Multi-National Forces Iraq will be made available to testify in open and closed sessions before the relevant committees of the Congress.
2007-09-10 17:22:44 · update #2
There is testimony, and there is sworn testimony. Apparently The one who uses the name of a "Goddess" but believes in no God, is not aware of that subtle difference.
As for requiring the testimony to be sworn, is this a court? Does the Congress have the power to require sworn testimony from the Executive Branch? Are there any charges being rendered here? Maybe in the mind of the pseudo-goddess, but she would benefit from an understanding of the Constitution.
2007-09-11 02:58:50 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If typical Petraeus went till now than congress to tell the fact the total fact and not something besides the undeniable fact that the fact, He might have chosen to have been sworn in, on condition that typical Petraeus chosen to no longer be sworn in, then He somewhat didnt flow till now than congress to tell the fact the total fact and not something besides the undeniable fact that the fact. typical Petraeus wasn't sworn in so he might circumvent telling the total fact.
2016-12-31 19:17:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If General Petraeus went before congress to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, He would have chosen to have been sworn in, since General Petraeus chose not to be sworn in, then He obviously didnt go before congress to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
General Petraeus wasn't sworn in so he could avoid telling the whole truth.
2007-09-11 09:22:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What I found more interesting is that the democrats shot off their mouths and carried on for more than an hour telling this four star patriot that they weren't "buying" anything he had to say - even before he had said anything and not knowing what the hell he was going to say in the first place.
Again, it's obviously pretty useless to try and inject a few facts into a mind that's already set in concrete and hell bent on total defeat.
2007-09-10 16:33:42 · answer #4 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
To repeat after LAMETORG, Petraeus was reporting on the military surge progess in Iraq, not testifying (as he did 6 months ago when he was confirmed).
2007-09-10 16:33:34 · answer #5 · answered by GL Supreme 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
How dare you disrespect somebody who has served their country honorably. You have no proof that he lied about anything. Besides, he was merely giving a briefing before Congress. Get your facts straight... His report if accurate just doesn't give the Democrats a leg to stand on. Is that what you're really scared of? Poor little liberals...
2007-09-10 16:21:43 · answer #6 · answered by Marco R 4 · 6⤊ 1⤋
There was a member of the audience who called out "Swear him in", thinking they may have simply forgotten because of the microphone problems, and got kicked out of the hearing as a result.
Here's his story:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/091007a.html
2007-09-11 07:12:38 · answer #7 · answered by ulty 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He did take an oath upon entering the MILITARY, and he is the U.S. GROUND FORCES COMMADER IN IRAQ!!! in a TIME OF WAR!!!! WITH EYES ON, As a soldier who has been there, I believe his word over, George Soros, Harry Ried, Daily Kos, Bill Clinton didn't he take an oath???? prejury charges, getting his law license ripped away a first for a U.S. President, Moveon.org, is that good enough for you
2007-09-10 16:22:55 · answer #8 · answered by dez604 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
No, he said what the Dems didn't want to hear, that's how we know Petraeus was telling the truth.
2007-09-10 16:23:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
It like this. If Gen.Petraeus was sworn in he would have to tell the truth. and the Democratic don't want that now do they?
2007-09-10 16:31:11 · answer #10 · answered by george 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋