Yesterday, on CBS’s Face the Nation, Dick Cheney unambiguously declared his willingness to testify before Congress about Bush-era torture policies:

SCHIEFFER: Would you go back and talk to the Congress?

CHENEY: Certainly. I’ve made it very clear that I feel very strongly that what we did here was exactly the right thing to do. And if I don’t speak out, then where do we find ourselves, Bob? Then the critics have free run, and there isn’t anybody there on the other side to tell the truth. So it’s important — it’s important that we…

Given that he has been accused of congenitally playing fast and loose with the truth, it was interesting how that clear and ringing certitude instantly changed into soft and mushy waffling when he was asked if he would be willing to testify under oath:

SCHIEFFER: Senator Leahy, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was on this broadcast recently. And I said, do you intend to ask the former vice president to come up? And he said if he will testify under oath. Would you be willing to testify under oath?

CHENEY: I’d have to see what the circumstances are and what kind of precedent we were setting. But certainly I wouldn’t be out here today if I didn’t feel comfortable talking about what we’re doing publicly.

There are only two kinds of precedents Cheney could possibly set. Telling the truth, which would certainly represent stepping into uncharted territory for him, or lying under oath, which could lead to some sleepless nights even if President Obama seems currently disinclined to prosecute anyone in the previous administration for anything.

So what’s going to happen first: Cheney testifying to Congress about torture in the time of Bush, or Sean Hannity keeping his April 22 pledge to undergo waterboarding to raise money for charity?