There really is a difference between Libby's case and Clinton's

[dsc]

I will admit that both lied under oath. It is pure non sense that Clinton wasn't alone with Monica Lewinski and one only has to listen to the tapes of Libby's grand jury testimony to know he was lying. The difference is that Libby lied about relevent things and Clinton didn't.

What Clinton did with Lewinski was actually exculptive of the charges in the Jones affair. The charges in the Jones case featured a pursuing Clinton while Lewinski pursued Clinton. To put this in perspective. Say you have a gay teacher in Mississippi who is charged with sexually harassing a collegue of the opposite gender. Say he has two possible defenses. One is that he is gay, the second that he has an alibi. He gets to choose which defense to use. He doesn't have to state he is gay, when he otherwise has an alibi. That is what Clinton essentially did.

Libby, on the other hand, directly lied about exactly the issue in his case. The whole case was who was and who wasn't leaking Plame's ID. You can't get more central that that.

Yes, conservatives are quite correct that Clinton and Libby were different. They are just wrong about what the difference is.