Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to How? Why are you asking me? Ask Fitzgerald. He had all the information.

Well no, he didn't, because Scooter lied to him.

Did you not listen to Fitzgerald's press conference?

It's what "obstruction of justice" means, Tom. What they've got, right now and only for the moment, is sufficient evidence to indict Libby on obstruction. They are not done.

Perhaps somone should investigate why you are suffering from obstruction of comprehension.

I have noticed a tendency among the Bush League apologists in the past couple of days to try, desperately, to minimize the indictment against Libby because it didn't meet the expectations of their leftist opponents. That's not mere spin, that's gold-medal gymnastics. It simultaneously combines a certainty in their presumption that they know precisely what their opponents are thinking, with the same arrogance that has led them, repeatedly in the recent past, to admonish Democrats to give in and give up... the same arrogance that has led you to post those very admonitions.

And so we -- that is, "the left", which really means "everyone who refuses to swallow the Bush League line" -- are now derided for being simultaneously gleeful that we got anything at all, and disappointed that it wasn't the Big Enchilada on the first go (please, see Frank Rich's column in today's NYT). One could just as easily imagine the White House, in its various nooks and crannies, simultaneously relieved and anxious for the same reason. I, for one, hope they are.

Look -- I know there's a chance that Scooter did this all on his own, in a personal vendetta against Wilson for saying "no evidence" when Beloved Fearless Leader claimed there was. I have no doubts about the imbecility of True Believers. On the other hand, I never bought the story that Ollie North did what he did on his own. I've heard that Saint Ronnie is GWB's personal hero and favorite past president. Don't you just love the irony?

And keep this in mind, too: Scooter still must stand trial in criminal court. There's nothing like the same kind of secrecy as before a grand jury. Subpoenas will be issued, and stonewalling of the kind not seen since Watergate is a foregone conclusion. The public just loves when the Executive does that... have you noticed?

If I were a Republican standing for (re)election in 2006, I'd be backpedaling as fast as I could.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (34 posts)