[jennyjenny]

I watched Kay Bailey Hutchison on MTP, and I didn't think she was saying committing perjury was a "technicality". I took her statement to mean that someone shouldn't be indicted for perjury if they innocently misspoke or contradicted themselves.

People can see someone forgetting if they met with someone on June 23 and/or July 7th. They can't see Clinton forgetting he received sexual favors from Monica Lewinsky, not once, but on several occasions. It's about intent and that's what she meant about "technicality".

[vrwinger]

>>>>>I watched Kay Bailey Hutchison on MTP, and I didn't think she was saying committing perjury was a "technicality". I took her statement to mean that someone shouldn't be indicted for perjury if they innocently misspoke or contradicted themselves.<<<<<

Exactly. Conversations, out of hundreds of such conversations, two years ago. KBH's point was, perjury is an intent to deceive, not a difference in two individuals' recollections.

WJC intended to deceive the Paula Jones proceedings. Big distinction.

That said, if Rove or Libby intended to deceive the GJ in this case, they're toast.

[Mo1]

People can see someone forgetting if they met with someone on June 23 and/or July 7th. They can't see Clinton forgetting he received sexual favors from Monica Lewinsky, not once, but on several occasions. It's about intent and that's what she meant about "technicality".

Bingo

This new talking point from the libs is laughable