« Home | Is it just me? » | Clear Verbiage Left Behind Act » | Pulling wings off of flies... » | A Rose By Any Other Name » | Back and out of the loop... » | kevvyd is not dead... » | Ma, they aren't listening to the phone anymore... ... » | Improvised Explosive Opportunity » | So where are we now? » | Oh Well, At Least They Beat Turkey »

Plausible deniability?

I just listened to the web cast of Mark Foley's lawyer and I'm amused at the tactic he's using. Here is the statement as everyone has heard it:
He reiterates unequivocally he has never had sexual contact with a minor

which might not be expressly true, if these comments made on the now-published internet chat session are legitimate.

However, if the lawyer actually said this:
He reiterates unequivocally he has never had sexual contact with a miner

at least he (the lawyer) can maintain plausible deniability later on.

This is hilarious. FOXNews had a graphic which referred to Foley as a Democrat, which admittedly could be a simple error. Later, they had three pundits discussing the scandal, and the pundits called him a Democrat. Less likely to be a simple error, more likely to be an intentional error.

Sean Hannity blames Clinton for this, of course. Clinton had sex with a 22-year old woman, whereas Foley tried to have sex with a 17 year old child. Definitely the same thing.

Post a Comment