|
The change has come, she's under my thumb.
Quote:
Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Wait a minute. Kinsley says there is something vague about whether or not outing a CIA agent is breaking the law, and then seems to piece together an analogy that basically says because the Press views the freedom to publish leaks as sacrosanct, there out to be a freedom to leak on the other side, and that putting Libby in a bind where he either had to confess involvement in a (potential crime) or perjure himself was improper.
First, this is crap logic.
|
That would be crap logic. I don't think he says that Libby should have been lying. I think he's calling the newspaper (esp. the Times) on their hypocrisy in printing Libby's leaks, refusing to testify about their involvement, and then calling for his prosecution. If they hadn't cooperated with him at the outset, he wouldn't have found himself in the perjury trap. That doesn't mean it was OK for him to lie.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
