Where Have I Heard This Before

This WaPo article makes it sound like Karl Rove is using a novel defense to wriggle his way out of an indictment:

In his fifth appearance before the grand jury, Rove spent considerable time arguing that it would have been foolish for him to knowingly mislead investigators about his role in the disclosure of the identity of undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame to the media, the source said.

Isn't this the plot to Basic Instinct?

John Correli: Did you kill Mr Boz, Miss Tramell?

Catherine: I'd have to be pretty stupid to write a book about killing and then kill him the way I described in my book. I'd be announcing myself as the killer. I'm not stupid.

[...]

Nick: Writing a book about it gives you an alibi for not killing him.

Catherine: Yes it does, doesn't it?

Somebody needs to frisk Karl Rove to see if he has an icepick. And is he a lesbian?

For the author of the most corrupt, double-dealing, devious Administration in recent memory to claim that he wouldn't break the law because he'd get caught is about as hilarious as you can get. They stole an election and didn't get caught! They went to war on false pretenses and didn't get caught! If all criminals claimed that it would be foolish for them to knowingly break the law all the prisons would be empty. "It would be foolish for me to rob that liquor store, your honor! The city employs cops! They'd come looking for me! Why would I want that?"

People commit crimes because they either don't care about the consequences (desperation, depression, psychopathology) or their moral center is non-existent. Figure out which one fits Turdblossom.

And, if you're going to pick a Paul Verhoeven movie to emulate, pick "Showgirls."