Because it’s becoming increasingly obvious that Rove’s “leak” was within the boundaries of the law, the question now becomes “did Rove lie under oath”. There’s a small part of me that really hopes that he did, because it would be endlessly amusing to watch liberals and democrats “find religion” on perjury which they made seem so innocuous back in ‘94 when President Clinton lied under oath about “having sexual relations with that woman”.
Moonbat Leftist Congressman John Conyers, Jr. (who is still going on about the Downing Street Memos… long ago debunked as worthless) writes (emphasis mine):
But the important lesson is that we not let the Supreme Court announcment (sic) distract us from the ongoing struggle to root out corruption and deception in the White House, by continuing our examinations of Rovegate, Downing Street, and the ongoing deception in Iraq. For example, there was an important article today in the American Prospect indicating that Rove may well have lied to the FBI – a serious legal matter.
It’s good to see him coming around. I wonder what his comments were on the Clinton impeachment. As a principled man of character, I’m sure he thought Clinton’s perjury was just as serious as Rove’s possible obstruction/perjury is now. Right?
I won’t hold my breath.
