It all depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.

Some might conclude that Alberto Gonzales perjured himself to Congress in his testimony about the "Patriot" Act:

As he sought to renew the USA Patriot Act two years ago, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales assured lawmakers that the FBI had not abused its potent new terrorism-fighting powers. "There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse," Gonzales told senators on April 27, 2005.

Six days earlier, the FBI sent Gonzales a copy of a report that said its agents had obtained personal information that they were not entitled to have. It was one of at least half a dozen reports of legal or procedural violations that Gonzales received in the three months before he made his statement to the Senate intelligence committee, according to internal FBI documents released under the Freedom of Information Act.

The acts recounted in the FBI reports included unauthorized surveillance, an illegal property search and a case in which an Internet firm improperly turned over a compact disc with data that the FBI was not entitled to collect, the documents show. Gonzales was copied on each report that said administrative rules or laws protecting civil liberties and privacy had been violated.

But, of course, it wasn't perjury since what he said was absolutely truthful if what he meant by "verified" was "verified by Congress." Congress had not "verified" any case of civil liberties abuse by the FBI. They were all done in secret precisely so they couldn't be verified by Congress. Ah, but now the Court has ruled that if they were done in secret, nobody can complain about them since nobody can prove they were done at all.