Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
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.
|
Kinsley says about Scooter: "I feel that he should not have had to face a perjury trap: the choice between prison for lying, or prison for his role in a set of transactions that the press regards as not merely O.K. but sacrosanct. " If this means, gee, we guys in the Press shouldn't have asked him questions about classified information, your reading would make sense. But I read it as saying he shouldn't have been put in the "perjury trap" that was not a trap at all, of course, thanks to the 5th Amendment.
Seems to me he's no upset about the traitorous lying weasel getting off.
