We’ve all heard the new truism: It’s not the crime, it’s coverup. But ex-U.S Attorney Bradley Schlozman thought he could skate.

In his case, the “crime” occurred, just before the 2006 election, after he caught four ACORN registration workers in Kansas City submitting bogus signatures. What he should have done, what Justice Department attorneys have always done, was to wait until after the election to bring indictments. You know, so as not to give the appearance of making political hay out of the situation. But he couldn’t resist it and five days before the polling started, headlines were splashed all over front pages in Missouri about the crooks ACORN had been employing.

When he was called to answer for his conduct before a Senate investigating committee last June, he could have fessed up and apologized. He’d have lost his job (which happened anyway), but hey, he wouldn’t be facing an indictment now for perjury.

But I’m getting ahead of the facts. All we have so far is a rumor–one we devoutly hope is true–that Schlozman might be the subject of a grand jury probe. And if he is, everybody’s money for the reason is that he perjured himself before that Senate committee, as Think Progress described at the time:

During his sworn Senate testimony last week, former Missouri U.S. Attorney Bradley Schlozman repeatedly asserted that he had been “directed” by Craig Donsanto, the head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes section, to file controversial voter fraud indictments against [ACORN] a week before the 2006 election.

Pressed by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), Schlozman testified that if questioned, Donsanto, who literally wrote the Department’s manual on how to approach election crimes, “would state explicitly and without reservation that he did in fact OK the issuing of the indictments.” But multiple former Justice Department officials have now come foward saying that it is highly unlikely Donsanto would have signed off on the indictments “of his own volition.”

Today, Schlozman sent a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) revising his sworn statements to Congress:

I wanted to take the opportunity to clarify my testimony with regard to the timing of the voter registration fraud indictments against four employees of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (“ACORN”).

Clarify? What do you think he might be planning to clarify? Oh, of course:

I want to be clear that, while I relied on the consultation with, and suggestions of, the Election Crimes Branch in bringing the indictments when I did, I take full responsibility for the decision to move forward with the prosecutions ….

“Clarify”? Uh-uh, Bradley, no do-overs on the playground. You don’t get to use the word “clarify” to wiggle out of perjury. And when is taking responsibility the antithesis of taking responsibility? When you pretend to do it because you didn’t do it when you should’ve.