Now, recently you may have heard Alberto Gonzales explaining to Congress how the NSA does not perform any surveillance inside the US without legal warrants, etc. Which is true... if you accept a definition of "surveillance" analogous to Clinton's definition of "sex." This might be enough legal cavilling to make what he said not strictly perjury, (or rather, that would be an issue if the Senate Judiciary Committee hadn't thoughtfully decided not to swear him in...) but I'd say it doesn't pass the smell test: this was surveillance by any plain-English understanding of the word.
So there you have the difference between the Clinton and Bush administrations: one prevaricates about his sex life, the other about the erosion of Constitutional liberties.
