Lost amid all the jokes is the fact that this did not start as a Federal investigation of prostitution, but as a fishing expedition to get any dirt available on Spitzer, a very prominant Democrat official.
Is he stupid beyond comprehension for doing this?
Yes.
Should the Feds -- who claim to need more resources to track terrorists -- be wasting their resources on what or whether a guy pays for a blow-job?
No.
Is the political misuse of the Justice Department more of a threat to America than al Qaida?
Absolutely.
Let's not forget that the major difference between Beria and J. Edgar (dresses aside) was that Hoover was a nonpartisan blackmailer and empire-builder. The present Justice Department has a very partisan bent that is used against troublesome Democrats -- sometimes under direct orders from Karl Rove (as with the exGov of Alabama), but more often by less direct and easily traced ways that direct policy: Fire the USA who indicts Republicans or who does not indict enough Democrats, appoint your Justice Dept hitmen to the empty spots.
When Henry II asked his knights "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" even the dullest of them understood it as an order to kill the Archbishop. And when Rove & Gonzales spoke or sent e-mails in disappearing ink, it was to USAs and FBI agents with lots of IQ points on Henry's hoods.
Fascism does not come with undemocratic acts by criminals. It comes with popularly-supported misuse of the law. The question is: Will history record 9/11 as our Reichstag fire? (For everyone who thinks "history" is who won Survivor last season, try looking it up.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The important question should be not if 911 was a Reichstag fire, but rather if a Reichstag fire has yet to be lit?
I wouldn't put it past Dick Cheney.
Phil...
I don't agree with the apparently partisan efforts of our justice department. I agree that fishing expeditions should be focused in other areas.
However, when lawyer/politicians are caught doing something unethical, is not the time to claim that those who caught them should not have been looking.
Actually, it is the only time you ever can make such a claim -- and should do so.
There is no one who is so sinless that he or she cannot -- if investigated closely enough -- be found to have done something that -- in the least favorable light, perhaps with the help of some slanted and/or purchased testimony -- could not be charged with a crime. That is why it is important that law enforcement NOT have a political stake in such matters.
With few exceptions involving mass murder, etc., it is better that eht crook go free than that the cop be corrupt. We can protect ourselves (or call the cops) to resist crime. Against corrupt cops and political prosecutors, we have no defense -- especially since the nems media have abrogated their responsibilities in favor of gossip.
If you think this is not a danger consider this: Both a presidency and a governorship have been crippled over a blowjob. Does that really make sense? Better to let a fool overpay for sex than have the FBI doing political fishing expeditions.
The presidency, although disgraceful to the office, did not involve a crime.
Nobody made something up about the Governor, he admitted to the crime. He planned it. Nobody trapped him.
You picked a poor example to state your case.
I'm still a guy that doesn't believe two attorneys don't look at the sale price on a contract.
I may have been born yesterday, but I've been up all night.
I also pay attention when someone says; "If he came into my office", instead of "If at any time, or at any place"- although one of those statements may be a lie.
I'm sharp enough to know that a savvy attorney chooses his/her words wisely.
Ah, but do you really believe that the Feds would be prosecuting if this were not a prominent Democrat. That is the issue, not wethter they can find some law to say he technically violated.
So he's a hypocritical dirtball. If the quote about the Nazis began "First they came for the hypocrites..." it would not be less accurate as a description of the danger of fascism.
Post a Comment