NRO's Byron York on 7/25 offered a perfect example of press excess--giving a trumped-up piece of pseudo-news front-page treatment in an effort to keep a press Lost Cause going: a story suggesting that Karl Rove faces a potential perjury rap out of Spy Gal Val's outing. The story is not about the details of Plame Blame, which I have hashed over enough. The Post took a statement by Rove that he couldn't recall if when called two years ago by Time's Matthew Cooper they had discussed welfare reform before moving on to the Niger uranium mission; Cooper says they did not discuss welfare reform. Could this form the basis of a perjury rap?
As York notes, for two reasons, fat chance: (1) a White House e-mail backs up Rove's version of the call; (2) the issue is not "material" (legalese for "important to the case") and thus even if Rove lied he did not commit perjury, which is defined not merely as lying under oath--the lie must concern as fact regarded in the case as "material."
Then York provides the clincher: The Post's engaged in this front-page speculation despite the fact that Cooper's avowedly clear recollection was unsupported by evidence, while Rove's tentative recall was supported by a contemporaneous e-mail. This is a story? Front-page material in the midst of a terror assault on London and a Supreme court pick? As political pundit extraordinaire Michael Barone writes, this is part of an ongoing effort by the Left to delegitimize 43 and Republicans (the latter began with Watergate). Nice try, guys.
York: Are They Kidding?
Barone: 30 Years' (Media) War