From last night’s Special Report with Brit Hume:

—On Bush’s Health Care Package—

MORT KONDRACKE: What it benefits is these people who have to buy the insurance on their own. They get a tax deduction and, for example, in the average case . . . you get your tax deduction at $4,500 if you’re a middle income person . . . The people who have . . . the richest policies would have to pay extra taxes.
BILL SAMMON: . . . not necessarily upper income people, people who have more expensive health insurance benefits packages. . . . Some of these union guys have these gold-plated Cadillac packages, which is one of the reasons why the Democrats don’t like it, at least they’re saying they don’t like because their union guys are squawking they don’t want to lose these Cadillac packages that they’ve negotiated with management.
KONDRACKE: [W]hat the administration wants to do is make people, individuals, more responsible for their own health insurance, paying their own health insurance and therefore, they think that that will . . . make people cost-conscious and drive down the cost of health insurance.

—On the Libby Trial—

KONDRACKE: [H]ere you have a D.C. jury which is presumably hostile to the Bush administration and Libby is defending himself by pointing fingers at the Bush White House, at Karl Rove, the president’s chief political advisor, and trying to show that he was a victim. . . .
You know, Scott McClellan, the former press secretary, at one stage was asked, is Karl rove involved in this and specifically excluded him and said that Karl Rove was not involved in the leak of this information. I don’t know that he as ever asked about Scooter Libby, but he didn’t mention Scooter Libby, did not exonerate Scooter Libby and this is basis. The third possibility is that this is Libby paranoia.
MARA LIASSON: Yes, and somehow through repeated visits to the grand jury, Rove managed to convince the prosecutor and the grand jury that he did not perjure himself, whereas Libby didn’t. And that’s what this case is about, whether Libby told the truth under questioning. It’s not about whether Libby leaked anything . . . Fitzgerald’s case is narrow, it’s about prudery and it’s — and it has to meet a certain standard, you have to willfully lie, you can’t just say something that’s false.