New York Times Calls Out Hillary

Today the New York Times is scolding President Bush for being Soft On Crime because of his action regarding Libby. You can read it for yourself but it's really pretty mild, especially as compared with when they suggested that Bill Clinton, now campaigning with his wife, was the crime when it came to pardons and Senator Clinton needed to acknowledge it. Don't think she's quite gotten there, yet.

Published: February 23, 2001

Nobody wants investigative gridlock, but it is important to understand that these pardons, whatever their legality, have posed a dilemma that became characteristic of the Clinton years. Mr. Clinton constantly forced the nation to an unappetizing choice between investigations and the even more unsatisfactory route of ignoring outrageous and perhaps illegal conduct. He liked to blame enemies in the press or the Republicans for these double-bind situations. But as Democrats are now admitting as readily as Republicans, he throws our political and legal systems into arrest because he constantly comes up with new ways of skirting the law or misrepresenting the facts that would never have occurred to anyone else in his position.

The Democrats in general and Senator Clinton in particular have to figure out how to disengage from this last and most squalid outrage. Mrs. Clinton's press conference yesterday was smoothly performed but evaded the key issues. She strongly condemned her brother for bad judgment. She disclaimed any knowledge until recent days that her campaign treasurer, William Cunningham III, had done legal work for two successful pardon applicants from Arkansas. Yet when pressed as to whether the Marc Rich pardon and others were right or wrong, she expressed her disappointment about the way events have ''unfolded,'' as if she were talking about the weather. From long and understandable habit, she chose the role of spouse over senator in refusing any comment on the substance of the pardons.

But with his outrageous abuse of the pardoning power, Mr. Clinton has thrust all of us, including his wife, into new territory. As a senator from New York, Mrs. Clinton has an obligation to share her value judgments about the official actions of the unfolder in chief.

Comments

[Randy]

I just can't wait to see the turning point when the media suddenly flips and loves Hillary once she's the nominee. Actually, the thought of it annoys me... but it's mildly amusing to watch it happen. Just watch, they won't necessarily gush over her, but the hit pieces on whoever the GOP nominee is will be in an insane abundance. Why more than usual? Because Hillary's negatives are almost insurmountable. When 52% of the country says they definitely won't vote for you (not to mention plenty of others who won't in the end either), you've got trouble. As has been the case for Dems in the past few elections, the game plan is to attempt to win by default by trying to make the public hate her opponent just slightly more than her.

[IslamoLlama]

Oh wow, Dan. I have to say, this is perhaps the most cocktastic "Clinton Did It TOOOO!!!" post I've seen in a long while. You could have done this entire article in two sentences - "Bush finally gave Libby his well-deserved 'Get Out of Jail Free Card' and btw, everyone including myself thinks Clinton is an evil SOB." I mean, seriously. This is almost as sad as the Gerry Studds-o-thon that errupted right after the Mark Foley scandal.

[IslamoLlama]

"Just watch, they won't necessarily gush over her, but the hit pieces on whoever the GOP nominee is will be in an insane abundance."

Perhaps you missed the 'Romney Hoses Down Shitty Dog', 'Guiliani Can't Be Bothered With 9/11', 'McCain Staff Implosion' trifecta we hit over the last few weeks? I mean, could there BE any more bad news getting reported on the right-wing Prez nominees?

[Hank]

What happened to the Republicans? What happened to the rule of law? I guess accountability is a something that does not apply to our monarch King George Bush and his court.

By the way, you talk about Marc Rich. Guess who his lawyer was? Scooter Libby.

[seekeronos]

"...As has been the case for Dems in the past few elections, the game plan is to attempt to win by default by trying to make the public hate her opponent just slightly more than her."

So true indeed, as demonstrated by the past three liberal commentors.

LOL: Are you sure that you are not (trying to be) misleading by implying that Bush pardoned or even granted some sort of commutation to Luis Posada Carriles?

Because as far as I read that article, it claims no such thing:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"On May 8, 2007 U.S. district judge Kathleen Cardone dismissed seven counts of immigration fraud and ordered Posada's electronic bracelet removed. In a 38 page ruling Judge Cardone criticized the U.S. government's "fraud, deceit and trickery" during the interview with immigration authorities that was the basis of the charges against Posada."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/05/08/posada.charges/index.html

Now although federal judges are appointed by the POTUS, they are confirmed by the Senate, i.a.w. Article III of the US Constitution. They also serve for life.

Unless you can categorically prove that there was some communication between the Hon. Kathleen Cardone's and President Bush, where he orders or directs the release of Mr. Carriles, then your argument is on very shaky ground.

[seekeronos]

"...Perhaps you missed the 'Romney Hoses Down Shitty Dog', 'Guiliani Can't Be Bothered With 9/11', 'McCain Staff Implosion' trifecta we hit over the last few weeks? I mean, could there BE any more bad news getting reported on the right-wing Prez nominees?"

No, but if it makes Fred Thompson a more viable choice in light of Romney's flip-flopping, Rudy's extreme social liberalism, and McCain's immigration floodgate openings... I won't mind.

[ec1009]

Today the President annonces that purgery and obstruction of justice and lying to federal investigators is fine.

What will we tell the children?

[IslamoLlama]

"Today the President annonces that purgery and obstruction of justice and lying to federal investigators is fine."

Only if you work for the President.
You know, the Catholic Church split over indulgences. I wonder what this will do to the Republican Party? Actually, I wonder what this will do to the Republican Party in '09, when it doesn't have Pope George the 2nd to forgive them their sins?

[Phoenix]

Jaysus, if you're going to pontificate and blaspheme, do it with some intelligence: It's PERJURY.

[seekeronos]

I wonder if Islamofoofoo is our buddy Justin Whitaker, Esq. under a new nick... he was fond of accusing people of "perger"-ing themselves as well.

[Phoenix]

Not the same syntax or hauteur, but an interesting thought. If so, he's a dog returning to eat his own vomit.

[bloodrage bob]

hey now, gang, y'all need to be *real* careful there. never EVER make fun of a loier; expecshially a LIBERAL loier.

those guys are stone-cold CILLERS.