I’m posting this to follow up on what Clarice wrote about why Bush ought to pardon Libby. Daniel Henninger in the WSJ:
I think there is a good legal argument for the Libby pardon, but others have done that well, making a credible case that he in fact is innocent. But there is another dimension to this that deserves consideration.
Washington is on thin ice. The American people could not be more disgusted than they are with the tenor and conduct of politics in Washington. The long Libby case was more muck. When the vice president’s chief of staff was convicted, financially ruined and professionally destroyed on the basis of a conversation, my first thought was, this is going to make it hard to attract the best people to serve in Washington.
Why wouldn’t the spouse of anyone offered a similar job argue that if the system can let a Scooter Libby wash over the falls for this, the price is just too high. “You aren’t going to put our family’s future at this much risk. We won’t serve. We can’t.”
Yes, a pardon would set the anti-Bush chorus to howling. So? They’ve done plenty to turn the city into a viper’s nest.
George Washington, in his farewell address, warned against the destructive force of party rancor. Something like that is at stake here again. Serious people in our politics, Republicans and Democrats, would understand that a Bush pardon of Scooter Libby is mainly about closing some of the worst wounds of these long war years. And about giving the nation a chance at refinding that lost unity.
These were hard years, and required hard decisions. It’s time to let Scooter Libby get back to work. Like the rest of Washington.
There’s plenty more at the WSJ today that would be worth your time, including and analysis of the bases on which the Minnesota Senate recounts are clearly unconstitutional in the light of Bush v Gore and how a spate of new political corruption cases might spur revisiting campaign finance laws (if we raise enough of a stink).
Over at Big Hollywood, Orson Bean summons the Holy Spirit, and at Stop the ACLU Roger’s dark night of the soul.
Meanwhile, at Commentary, Jennifer Rubin thinks Eric Holder’s got some splainin’ to do.
Only for Republican administrations. That threat will help to level the Washington political playing field. Otherwise the Democrats, having winnowed their own ranks with their wonderful, intra-party, blind loyalty and ass kissing contest, would be at an even greater disadvantage.
Fitz got Scooter convicted on a memory lapse (on what he had told a dubass reporter). Can anyone imagine what may be coming Blago/Rahm/Obama’s way?
A man can dream, can’t he?
When Blago sings, the heavens may delight.
Fitzgerald is a very small man. He is a lot worthy of Chicago politics I think.
niccolai, you got it backwards I think. The question was about what Libby said that Russert had told Libby, not what Libbey had told to Russert. But this of course is indicative of how complicated the whole case was and how puny the questions of error or falsity.
There was a lot complaining when Ford pardoned Nixon, but the country managed to survive.
Meanwhile, no crime was committed, Armitage is a free man, and Colin Powell is still respected by many.
There is a bottom somewhere. I don’t think we’ve hit it yet.
“Colin Powell is still respected by many.”
Belch.
Colin Powell has been a lot useless for nigh on a decade now. His not really much of a go-getter, that one.
oh. *He’s* I meant. The heat is getting to me I think.
There is a bottom somewhere. I don’t think we’ve hit it yet.
Those who think it’s a good idea to prosecute outgoing government officials might find it wise to look into why Caesar crossed the Rubicon, I think.