FBI Director Mueller says Gonzales perjured himself

While the clock is ticking on whether Gonzales will change his testimony, the evidence for perjury continues to mount.

In his own sworn testimony Thursday, Mueller contradicted his boss, saying under questioning that the terrorist surveillance program (TSP) was the topic of the hospital room dispute between top Bush administration officials.

Mueller was not in the hospital room at the time of the dramatic March 10, 2004, confrontation between Ashcroft and presidential advisers Andy Card and Gonzales, who was then serving as White House counsel. Mueller told the House Judiciary Committee he arrived shortly after they left, and then spoke with the ailing Ashcroft.

"Did you have an understanding that the conversation was on TSP?" asked Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas in a round of questioning that may have sounded to listeners like bureaucratic alphabet soup.

"I had an understanding the discussion was on a NSA program, yes," Mueller answered.

Jackson sought to clarify: "We use 'TSP,' we use 'warrantless wiretapping,' so would I be comfortable in saying that those were the items that were part of the discussion?"

"The discussion was on a national NSA program that has been much discussed, yes," Mueller responded.

(ThinkProgress has the video.)

What I don't understand on Gonzales is the "why?" Why did he perjure himself with so many easily accessible contradictory witnesses and at least one document even after Schumer gave him several opportunities to correct himself?

Given those circumstances, you have to assume it was an intentional act, but why?

Was he hoping to hide behind classification? Is there some nuance in this they're going to try to play? Is there some larger crime around the NSA wiretapping that this Gonzales' testimony hides?

I just don't get it.

Also Today, a subpoena was issued by the Senate Judiciary Committee "to compel the testimony of Karl Rove" regarding the US attorney firings.