Did the Leaker-in-Chief Lie To Fitzgerald?

Thanks.
What's your take on the
"At the administration's request, the session will not be recorded and an official transcript will not be made"

Has it happened before? If yes when and why? (if you can remember)

What's the point of having a testimony if there is no paper trail?
How do we know if what they said is truth or lie? It's between Bush, Cheney and their own selected panel, right?

 

The President's club.

Membership does have its privileges....

 

As Z says, the President's Club has its privileges! Anyway, one of the fundamental premises of our government is that a person may not be finally deprived of life, liberty or property without Due Process of law.

Some of the components of procedural due process are: the right to reasonable notice of pending legal action, and a meaningful opporutnity to appear and present one's position before a neutral decisionmaker, who will make findings, conclusions and render a judgment based upon the facts found "on the record."

Where there is no record, there is no due process, and that means no possibility of any final deprivation of life, liberty or property.

So, perhaps, the Pres and the VP sought to insuate themselves from any possible later use of their testimony, even if it were published word for word via a secret recording, because there was no due process provided during the hearing.

Conversely, one could argue that Bush/Cheney waived their respective due process rights by refusing to testify on the record, but I doubt that this is a "waivable" right, because without the record, everything that happend is subject to later dispute, and there is nothing for a neutral decisionmaker to weigh with any accuracy.

This is not, however, the same as a private investigative session with the special prosecutor, not on the record, because such a session is undertaken by an interested party, rather than a neutral decisionmaker, who has no power to make a final deprivation of rights.

So, Fitzgerald's personal knowledge of his meeting with the President could be used as evidence in a later hearing. Although, it would just be Fitz's word against Bush's, so the testimony wouldn't be worth much.