I am convinced that these responses show no inconsistencies or evidence that Mr. Olson misled or was less than truthful to the committee in any way. Rather, they show him to be forthright and honest,
There is little evidence that a broad federalization of hate crimes is warranted, ... Serious constitutional questions remain.
There is little or no evidence that shows that states and localities are being derelict in their duties to enforce the law,
When you have no evidence of impropriety, no evidence of fraud ... to just count and count until someone wins one way or the other just isn't the way to do it.
I'm sure the president realizes that some would say this is a 'Wag the Dog' situation. It's an appropriate foreign policy response to terrorism at an appropriate time having obtained appropriate evidence and knowledge to justify the action.