After reading this last part of the "discussion" here's what ya'll need to think about - first some history:
Testifying under oath for a president is something that was not really thought of by the framers of the Constitution - the idea that Anyone would testify under oath for their own defense was not even allowed in this country till after the Civil War - before that (and at the time of the Constitution) everyone figured a defendant would lie to cover himself so this wasnt even an option in court cases. It only became an option after the Civil war when after a few highly publicized cases of negroes being allowed to testify, the whites figured if they were allowed then they better change the court system to allow all defendants to testify under oath.
Historically, Presidents haven't been forced to testify, although the only thing that kept them from being called was either deals with congress or allowing their subordinates to testify for them. With the establishment of the "special prosecuter" which is a very recent event, things changed a little although keep in mind that the only thing that keeps a President from testifying is the public will - the American people have never required it and probably (with the huge amount of apathy rampant in todays America) they never will.
The spin "facts" that are being put out here are just that - spin - and although you guys may believe all of your biased opinions from both sides - it isnt gonna change anything - both of these events have already happened and no amount of bickering (discussion) is gonna go back and put it right for either side
If you need an example of a true lie by the current president - its real simple - look to the accounting by all news organizations about the 9/11 crisis - both conservative and liberal presses have reported that the President stated when he saw the first plane hit the WTC on that morning when he was in an elementry school classroom (he got shown this supposedly right before he went into the classroom - or so the news has reported) his words were "stupid pilot" - Im sure all of you will agree that this is what was reported and what he has always stated - right???
Here's the part thats a lie - if you go back and check with the news stations - NONE of them showed a video of the first plane hitting the WTC till the next day - only the second plane later on while Bush was already in the classroom - follow the timeline! When the second plane hit his aide came into the classroom and informed him - we've all seen his reaction to that - so here's my question - Did he lie about seeing the first plane hit and saying "stupid pilot"? Its the story he's always told - and yet - not one media source ever broadcast the first plane that day.
All of you that needed some fuel - there ya go
As far as the original post's question - Should they be required to testify under oath? My answer/opinion is yes - but I'm only one voter out of all of the Americans that vote - the rest would have to vote to settle that issue. And getting the country to vote would be the biggest hurdle to all of this.