Tuesday, October 25, 2005

Fitzgerald's Folly?

Today, Howard Kurtz digs deeper into Sen. Hutchison's "perjury is a technicality" argument from Sunday's Meet the Press. As always, Kurtz brings a clear, unbiased eye to the topic.

Now, Large Bill (Go, Buckeyes!) made a good point yeserday, differentiating between willful, misleading perjury (meant to obstruct or stymie a prosecutor's case) and a simple, mistaken, mistatement of fact (accidental, no malice intended).

Of course, if that was what the Good Senator intended, she should have said so. In fact, she pulled out Martha Stewart as an example of prosecutorial over-reaching. In fact, Martha's brand of obstruction was willful and intended to derail an invenstigation. It wasn't a simple, incidental mistake.

However, I have to agree (yikes! stop the presses!) with some of what Bill Kristol has been saying: if this isn't out-and-out, steer-them-off-the-trail perjury, it's probably best to let the whole, overblown issue die. Frankly, we all need to take a step back from "gotcha" politics - if indeed that's what this case may turn into.


On closer reading, it would appear that - if, indeed, Libby and Rove are indicted on obstruction or perjury - the charges could meaningful, and not of the "trivial" variety.

Money quote, from today's WaPo White House Briefing:
Rove is said to have initially told the grand jury he first heard about Plame from some reporter, but he couldn't remember who. Then he said he heard it from Libby.
Libby is said to have initially told the grand jury he first heard about Plame from reporters -- but they denied it. And now, says the Times, Libby's own notes show he heard it from Cheney.

These sound like willfully misleading statements, attempting to put Fitzie's team on the trail of reporters, and away from the Office of the Vice President.

The plot thickens....


Post a Comment

<< Home

Blog Directory & Search engine Find Blogs in the Blog Directory Blogarama - The Blog Directory Personal Blog Top Sites