ehBeth wrote:depressing news on a grey day
How so?
For me, it's encouraging that no matter how often these schmucks in DC will consider themselves, somehow, above the law, the Law keeps bringing them back in line.
The difference between America and the rest of the world isn't that we have political leaders who are above the temptations and corruption of power, but that we have a system of government and law that consistently keeps them in check.
No one was going to be indicted for blowing Plammes's diaphanous "cover." Stretching existing laws to deem her "outing" as a crime was beyond the most zealous of prosecutors, but Libby walked right into it by failing to tell the truth.
What was gained by Libby claiming that he heard of Plamme's CIA connections from reporters rather than Cheaney? It wasn't even remotely a crime for two individuals with top secret clearances to discuss the CIA connections of anyone, clandestine or otherwise.
There was nothing to cover up.
What motivated Libby to lie to the Grand Jury (assuming he did) is beyond me. Even if we assume the most sinister of conspiracies having been hatched by the White House, telling the truth about where he heard of Plamme's CIA connection would not have, perforce, revealed it.
Lying in DC has, apparently, become an accepted practice.
It is a bright day in America when our legal system delivers a message to the powerful that lying is
not a small sin.
If only this message was consistently delivered.
Libby has, apparently, had the personal misfortune of telling his lies to a skilled and dedicated professional prosecutor. Nothing suggests to me that this investigation and the idictment have partisan derivations.
It is nonsense of the intensely partisan variety to suggest, as Ma Pelosi does, that this scenario is somehow emblematic of a Republican "culture of corruption."
It may very well be evidence of a
DC "culture of corruption," but to argue that the Democrats are distinct from such a culture is clearly absurd.
Power, not money, is the root of all evil, and the hunger for power is not restricted to any political party.
If Libby is, in fact, guilty of the charges, I hope they throw the book at him. Someone in a position of power such as he held should be doing all he can to not only follow the letter of the law, but to avoid the appearance of dismissing the confines of the law.
I do, however, have a couple of concerns about these developments:
We do need to be careful that we do not criminalize political dirty tricks. The game of politics in this country is major league hard ball, and as noxious as it may sometimes seem to be, it serves a purpose. We do not need to force gentility on politics through inconsistent legal prosecutions.
We can no more, in general, trust special prosecutors and the judiciary to be reliably above politics than we can legislators and members of the Executive branch.
In my opinion, Fitzgerald serves no meaningful public purpose by keeping Karl Rove on tenterhooks. Either indict the man, or put a close to the investigation. Whether you like Rove or not, he is an integral part of the Administration formed by the man we elected as president. Neutering him by threatening an open-ended investigation does no service to the public.
One is reminded of the pithy adage of "Sh*t or get off the pot!"
Recently, I was outraged to learn that there has endured a Special Prosecutors investigation into whether or not Hillary Clinton somehow violated the law as respects the (hardly) infamous "Travel-Gate" scandal. As much as I might like to see Hil behind bars, if a prosecutor cannot after 8 or 10 years and $20 million in costs, develop an accusation that offers the promise of putting someone's ass behind bars, then I say
enough is enough. The concept of Special Prosecutors should not have encompassed the notion of providing for a neverending sweet gig for the lucky S.O.B.s that may have got the nod.
